Amendments regarding the two different neighborhoods.
>> okay. Thank you so much mr. Clerk
with that I don't see anyone on the roster so let's go to
public comment on this item. >> thank you madam chair.
land use and transportation will now hear public comment on
agenda item number two related to priority processing for
certain commercial uses. If you have public comment for
this item please line up to speak along that western wall
and if the first speaker wants to come forward to the lectern
I'll start your time. >> thank you.
good afternoon chairman melgar survivors mahmood and chen.
my name is nick ferris. I serve as president of the
telegraph hill dwellers and on behalf of thg and on behalf of
kevin de quatro, the north beach business association
and chinatown community development center, we
respectfully request that the land use committee amend the
proposed priority processing legislation to exclude the
north beach neighborhood commercial district the north
beach special use district and the k venti quatro latino
cultural sued the planning commission as you just heard
unanimously recommended these amendments not just that there
has been zero public outreach and education to our community
. Both of these districts are
thriving and have a healthy mix of locally owned businesses
in north beach we have less commercial vacancies today than
we did pre-pandemic. We have led the post-pandemic
economic recovery and maintain the small business character of
our commercial district. Bottom line the process is
working and as far as we're concerned it doesn't need
fixing. Please amend the legislation
and to exclude north beach and k venti quatro from this
legislation. >> thank you.
thank you for your comments. So the next speaker please.
>> hi, good afternoon chairman melgar and supervisor chen
and mahmood my name is ramone schmaltz and in addition to my
20 years as a resident I have been a regular event producer
in north beach for 15 years and was a brick and mortar
gallery and event space owner operator on green street
and columbus avenue from 2014 until the pandemic.
>> I was also a designer, curator and a director and head
of marketing for the massive north beach first fridays art
walk and merchant walk from 2019 until 2022 and I currently
work in art design and marketing for local artists
and musicians and creative business folks that is to say I
know my neighborhood, its businesses and their owners its
trends over decades, its needs and its vulnerabilities.
every day I am there with my people and I join with the
mission kyiv and de quatro north beach business associate
and the chinatown community development center
and telegraph hill dwellers to respectfully request that the
land use committee amend the proposed priority processing
legislation to exclude the north beach and cd the north
beach city and the cove anti-castro latino cultural
district sued. These amendments were
unanimously recommended by the planning commission last
thursday and we have had to thriving districts whose wide
variety of local locally owned businesses has created a safety
net for its residents needs. North beach has far fewer
commercial vacancies today than we have had before the pandemic
because of how well this is working it's really working
and as I did with north beach first fridays reopening in the
august of 2020 with wild safe success, our local business
owners have bravely led the post-pandemic economic recovery
and maintain small business character of our commercial
district that takes a world of cooperation and dedication.
so the existing planning process has been working
and our businesses are bringing health and vitality to our
commercial corridors and the greater neighborhoods as a
direct result, please amend the legislation to exclude north
beach and k 24 from this legislation.
I appreciate your time. Thank you for your comments to
the next speaker please. >> well all has been said.
teresa flannery north beach tennis committee I am here
joining of course all of these organizations that were already
mentioned in request ing that you amend this and exclude
north beach and ave anti quattro I want to say that the
existing process is indeed working.
our special districts are just they are special and we only
survived the pandemic because of our many, many, many small
businesses where we could get the essential needs of our
households met. We we lost our 39 bus that
serves north beach and telegraph hill.
>> we were many seniors and families were unable to
then get down to the bigger markets and we were so
fortunate to have so many different markets within
walking distance in north beach.
so it is working. We want to continue that.
we survived and and are thriving.
>> we need this in our community to remain also for k
venti quattro again it is you know we need to be excluded
from this legislation and so I'm asking you to please do
that to please help us remain an existing thriving community
and thank you so much for your time today.
>> thank you for your comments. Next speaker please.
when I started supervisors my name is susana rojas.
>> I am the executive director of community water latino
cultural district. >> cada quatro was created
because of the mass displacement displacement
caused by the gentrification of our communities and the removal
of our cultural assets. >> our conditionally is
district were created to give us a chance to thoughtfully
weigh in work and integrate businesses to the corridor to
benefit them and the community in a more meaningful manner by
meeting four out of six cultural conditions.
>> our corridor today has one of the lowest vacancy rates
in the city with six vacancies out of 151 which makes it 4% as
of june 23rd of 2025. >> we compare to sales tax
revenues for the third quarter of 2019 versus the same quarter
in 2023 and found that during that four year period the
mission sales tax revenue was only down 1.29% compared to 39%
for downtown town and 12.75 percent for the rest of the
city. That measure recovery appears
to be outpacing the city at large and I know their
neighborhoods but not north beach not reaching 2020 are
competing when when it comes to recovery and that's a great
thing and we are here to respectfully request that guide
events quatro and north beach are removed and thank you
director tang and thank you to the planning commission for
making that recommendation. >> thank you all.
>> thank you for your comments. Do we have anyone else who has
public comment for agenda item number two?
>> madam chair, thank you so much.
public comment on this item is now closed before I go to you
vice chair to make the amendments you're going to make
the amendments right and I just wanted to say a couple of
things at first thank you to staff for this legislation for
folks who haven't actually read the legislation it really seeks
to clarify and simplify what is right now two different regimes
through which people get permits for businesses and you
know I can't speak about north beach.
>> it is not, you know, a commercial district that I am
all that familiar with other than just shopping there
and eating there. But I do know I have empty
quattro. I spent years of my career
doing technical assistance and support to small businesses
and I think it is working for some and I think it's not
working for others. I personally think it's a
mistake to exempt these two neighborhoods from this and I
think it doesn't work for is at non-english-speaking folks
immigrants who are starting a small business although I
recognize that for people who already have businesses it you
know, sort of like they've already been through it they
figure that out already so that's not a problem.
however, it is not my district. I don't represent either
district nine or district three and I have spoken to both
supervisors and they are in agreement with exempting
and I will just say that even though I did watch the planning
commission discussion and realize that it was a
unanimous vote after a lot of conversation I think people
were confused by this because it is confusing and that's the
point. It's very confusing.
so for somebody trying to open up a new business who doesn't
speak english or is from a different country as many many
of our small businesses are it you know, you have to hire an
expediter or have somebody from the mission economic
development agency are going to go out to hold your hand to
like figure it out. And so is that the best public
policy? I don't think it is.
but you know, because the supervisors for both districts
are okay with that I will vote to support those amendments
exempting those two things. What I will just say to folks
who care about these corridors is I think, you know, it's
important to look at you know, not just today and yesterday
but also tomorrow. >> I think that's really
important too. Okay.
with that supervisor chen thank you, chair.
>> I just want to say I am very supportive of the effort that
in our city trying to make our permit process more
transparent, easier to navigate and faster I think this is the
city it's really in agreement with like this is how we can
continue to make sure that we have a thriving city but also I
think we need to strike a balance and I think especially
when it comes to protecting the unique character of our
neighborhood and also our commercial area and cultural
districts. And I know that our communities
especially in this kind of cultural district and and
neighborhood business corridors they know what is best for
their neighborhoods and and especially I think after facing
in cultural district right. Facing years of trauma
and displacement I think our city should continue to work
with extra care and respect with this.
so with that I want to also express my support for the
legislation and also continue to support the amendment to
cavo with the recommendation from the planning department.
>> thank you. And I you want to make a motion
for both together an amendment and then okay and I would like
to make a motion to include amendment and together as a
whole to what a full bore recommend would a full
committee positive recommendation to the full
board. >> thank you.
we have a motion from the vice chair that the ordinance be
amended as presented and then recommended as amended to the
board of supervisors on those motions.
vice chair chen chen I remember mohamed mahmood I chair melgar
melgar I madam chair there are three eyes okay thank you.
>> a motion passes. Thank you mr. Clerk.
let's now go to item number three.
this is exciting because we've been talking about this for
years. >> agenda item number three is
an ordinance amending the building and planning codes to
extend the awning amnesty program to apply to existing
unpermitted signs and gates amending the planning code to
remove design standards for gates railings and grill work
on ground floor street frontages of non historic
buildings in neighborhood commercial residential,
commercial, commercial and mixed use districts.
the ordinance affirms the planning department secret
determination it makes findings of consistency with the general
plan in findings of public necessity convenience
and welfare. >> okay director tang that
shows yours. All right.
thank you supervisors. So for this next item here I
have a powerpoint on the screen.
>> thank you very much. >> so at a very high level the
proposal before you today is to allow businesses with security
gates that are in existence to participate in the amnesty
program which has been going on for about two years.
that was the result of several hundred complaints filed
against businesses for having installations of a variety of
things including awning signs and gates done without permits
and then also additionally allowing the security gates to
be 100% solid and that would be an amendment to the planning
department's requirements there are currently there are about
100 small businesses that are facing a planning code
violation for the security gates installed without a
permit and without the changes that you're going to be voting
on today, they would actually not be able to participate
in the amnesty program. A lot of them would actually
have to remove the gates and then either reinstall or do
without it which can be very costly.
we've heard from a lot of businesses that unfortunately
we're just out of state right now where many of them could
probably raise their hands and tell you that they have
faced repeat vandalism, burglaries, multiple occasions
and that the solid nature of the gates is is what helps them
sleep at night. >> currently the scissor gates
are the preferred kind of design standard.
however, again we understand kind of what these businesses
are facing on a daily basis. The photos you'll see here on
the screen just show a few of the existing gates that are
installed on along businesses on grant avenue and mission
street and so many of them are out there already and we'd like
to them to just be able to close out these complaints so
that they don't eventually lead to notices violations for these
properties. >> so with that I'm going to
turn it over to aaron star from planning department.
this one's a little simpler. The planning commission heard
this on june 26th and recommended approval.
happy to answer any questions if you have.
>> okay. So I don't have any questions.
I don't see anyone on the roster.
I just. >> okay.
supervisor ten thank you. >> chair small business.
it's definitely something that I prioritize and value a lot
and I have done a lot of work with especially in the
chinatown with the small business and I think especially
also now in district 11 it's also a lot of mom and pops
immigrant owned shops and and a lot of the merchant has come to
my office and asking for the protections protection against
graffiti against brooklyn and gardens also unfair for
long existing 50 years gaze and signs.
so I think this ordinance answers all and this is really
a big change that is supporting our small business and I want
to thank the director and thank depending on the department
and working closely with our small business community to
come up with the ordinance and thank you.
>> thank you so much supervisor chen and thank you madam
director and mr. Star for the work.
I as director tang knows would rather take awnings and gates
out of the planning code altogether there and just leave
them in the building code but this is progress so I'll take
it. >> thank you so much.
I do think that you know sometimes these things get
weaponized and I don't like it and I think it is you know
particularly the small mom and pop and immigrant owned
businesses that suffer the most out of these things and a lot
of times it is to comply with the esthetics of some and not
the businesses that actually worked really hard day in and
day out to stay afloat. So with that let's go to public
comment and again thank you. >> staff thank you madam chair.
land use and transportation we'll now hear public comment
for agenda item number three related to existing awning sign
and gate please come forward to the lectern if you have public
comment for this item. >> hi, good afternoon
supervisor my name is keefer who am determined to help
implement training and economic development as self-help for
the elderly. We provide service to small
business in the last five years and we want to share the
support of this legislation that extend the awning msd
and amending the practical to move design stand for gate
rolling and up on grant for the small business are still
suffering since the pandemic and just last week one of the
small business in chinatown where being rental vandalized
again for three times if seven cisco is to continue enforcing
the transparency security gate that will lead to a nado
vandalism to happen again for the next few years.
so we and that will deeply impact the cost of time
and money for small business even though the vandalism we
live grant is still a variable but it will waste the city's
unnecessary budget especially when the city is facing a
budget deficit. So we strongly hope the
supervisors will support this legislation and support local
small business. >> thank you.
>> thank you. Do we have anyone else who has
public comment for agenda item number three before we please
come and we before we close public comment I note that
michelle andrews is here from supervisor sadr's office who is
a co-sponsor on the legislation.
so if you wanted to comment on it.
>> yeah. Thank you chairman going before
do that. Madam chair, do you want me to
have this be part of our time to public comment period or is
it going to take you more than two minutes?
>> no. Okay.
okay. Michelle andrews legislative
aide for supervisor sauder supervisor sauder is proud to
co-sponsor this legislation. Just add on to what director
tang said we've heard from many small businesses in our
district, especially in chinatown that have been
faced with unexpected enforcement complaints
and requirements to change decades old gates and signs
many of which have been in place since before they even
moved into the building. So we're very supportive of
this legislation. The ability to have 100% sold
gates is also incredibly helpful for the businesses that
experience repeated vandalism and burglaries.
>> we should be listening to small businesses when they tell
us what they need to be able to do to stay open in our city.
>> thank you. Thank you.
ms. Sanders thank you. >> do we have anyone else who
has public comment for agenda item number three, madam chair
okay. >> with that public comment is
now closed. >> do you want to make a motion
vice chair thank you chair I would like to make a motion to
move file number 250539 with positive recommendation to the
full board. >> thank you.
on the motion offered by the vice chair that this ordinance
be recommended to the board of supervisors vice chair chen
chen I'm a moment by moment I chair melgar I melgar I madam
chair there are three eyes thank you.
>> that motion passes. >> let's go to item number four
please mr. Clerk. Agenda item number four is an
ordinance amending the planning code to first principally
permit certain non-retail sales and service uses including
general office design, professional business services
and non retail professional services and trade offices on
the ground floor in the c-3 districts through december
31st, 2013 after which such uses uses will be conditionally
permitted. >> second principally permit
retail sales and service uses on the second floor and above
in the r c districts. Third principally permit non
retail sales and service uses on the second floor and above
in the r c districts. Fourth update transparency
and fenestration requirements for ground floor activity uses
and exempt child care facilities homeless shelters
mortuaries religious institutions reproductive
health clinics and school uses from those requirements.
fifth define an interior sign and the applicable standards
for interior signs sixth exempt interior signs of six square
feet or less and business in identifying signs painted on
building facades from a permit under the planning code.
seventh modify the definition of a nonresidential use for the
purposes of certain development impact fee waivers as well as
affirming the planning department sequel determination
and making findings of consistency with a general plan
and findings of public necessity, convenience
and welfare. >> thank you so much mr. Clerk.
welcome again. Director tang thank you very
much. >> supervisor so I apologize
this one will be maybe a little bit longer but at a very high
level for this item we could think of it as four different
kind of buckets of changes. One has to do with storefront
transparency and you'll see on the screen here to the far left
that the high level proposal is exempt certain critical users
from the storefront transparency requirements.
this was sparked after we were contacted by a child care
facility on a busy commercial corridor where they have
covered up their entire storefront really out of
concern for the privacy for the children that they serve.
they're very upset by the requirement from the city that
they actually have to leave a certain percentage open
and visible to the public. While we were at it, we realize
that there's some other critical uses that could
benefit from that same exemption including schools,
homeless shelters, mortuaries, religious institutions
and reproductive health clinics.
and so that is part of the proposal to exempt them from
the storefront transparency requirement.
moving over to the right side of the screen with regards to
business signs, the proposal is to remove the permit
requirement for business signs that are painted on building
facades as well as for window signs and interior signs.
the two photos that you'll see here are true real life
examples where these businesses received violations from the
city for putting these up without a permit.
>> so on the center photo the a vinyl stickers with the chinese
characters on the facade as well as the neon sign in the
window on the far right photo those are examples are business
owners had to take time out of their busy day to come to the
permit center and try to resolve the issue by filing a
permit with the city. >> next slide here with regards
to downtown uses the proposal is to principally permit
certain non-retail sales and service uses on the ground
floor specifically within the c-3 district.
so downtown commercial districts through 2030 so for a
very limited period of time to provide more and incentive some
of these companies that are downtown, they're located
there. They're really trying to create
more amenities for the employees as an incentive to
draw people to come back to the office in person and to
activate these ground floor workspaces.
you'll see some of the photos here, examples where some of
these companies or organizations are trying to do
that already are the photo shown here is on montgomery
street where there's some co-working spaces as well as a
cafe and the one in the center bottom is an example of one
that had to recently go through the planning commission for
such approval. >> we do think this is really
important because the more people who come and work
in person especially downtown it helps the surrounding small
businesses that are located there and that have been
suffering also since more people have been telecommuting.
so not only is this good for again the companies that want
to better monetize their buildings, it's also really
important for the small business owners in that
surrounding area. >> and then moving on to
residential rc districts the proposal is to ease the filling
of non ground floor vacancies within rc districts by
principally permitting retail sales and service uses and non
retail sales and service uses at the second floor and above.
and there is an example where we are working with industrial
design studio on the second floor along venice.
there was a complaint against them and without the change
they would not they would actually not be allowed to
operate there any longer. >> and so for this item we have
sent over to the committee members a number of amendments
that we'd like to propose. These were all discussed at the
planning commission and huge shout out to deputy city
attorney julia michael nelson for all of her work on these
the number of amendments that were made.
I'm just going to walk them over quickly but I believe you
have a summary sheet in front of you with regards to signs we
are actually going to eliminate reference to interior signage
and instead we more clearly define what a window sign is
and that means a sign that is touching only the inside or
outside of a window. Therefore anything that's
interior inside is no longer a sign and would not have to
follow the requirement for planning approval.
we have worked with some businesses where they
installed, you know, a sign inside their business but was
visible from the street and they got they received
complaints about those. So we want to eliminate those
kind of scenarios. And because we did that we also
had to make a lot of subsequent changes which is why you'll see
that repeated throughout various districts that we just
repeat the change in reference of how a window sinus is
defined. >> the other clarification made
is how the window sign area is measured and so the current
practice is that it's an area as a function of the window the
specific window where the sign is located.
we are now clarifying it is the sign is the percentage is the
area of a function of all the individuals ground floor
windows and any glazing on doors regardless of which a
window or door the sign is actually located on.
and then we're just making consistent that the perimeter
id area of the window sign can be one third of the totality of
all the windows and glazing on doors versus some some cases
in the planning code. It's one third and some it's
one fourth. So we just want to make that
all very consistent and then also we clarify that any
application so that applying of a sign does not require
planning approval. So any essentially
nonstructural signs will not require planning approval
and application of signs could mean things like painting
you've applied paint to a facade as well as vinyl
stickers. >> so those are some very easy
examples. And so those are all the
changes reflected regarding signs and then moving on to
transparency we are proposing to remove interior and the
window sign exception to the transparency requirements.
and then there are some other clarifying edits really just to
clarify that again no change. >> there are no changes
regarding transparency outside of business operating hours.
>> and then moving on to ground floor uses we did realize that
there needed to be an amendment made to section 124 of the
planning code to exempt new gross floor area created in the
c-3 district through a change of use on the ground floor of
space that was devoted to uses previously excluded from gross
gross floor area per section 102 and also exempt c-3
districts from section 140 5.4 which had to do with required
ground floor commercial uses again temporarily through
december 31st of 2013 and then next with regards to the rincon
hill downtown residential that's our hdr district.
the proposal for the amendment is to exempt from required
ground floor commercial uses buildings in the rhd etr
district that are one designated landmark buildings
or contributory buildings within a designated historic
district pursuant to article ten of the planning code or to
listed on or determined eligible for the california
register of historical resources by the state office
of historic preservation and then also to amend section
803.9 of the planning code to principally permit all uses
in certain historic buildings in rhd for subject to certain
exceptions and that would be in perpetuity perpetuity.
>> and then finally for residential commercial
districts which are rc districts would be to allow
catering and laboratory uses on the ground floor within rc
districts with the conditional use authorization.
and so those are the amendments before you today and then I'm
going to turn it over to erin starr from the planning
department. >> thank you, director tang
erin starr manager of legislative affairs the
planning commission heard this last thursday on june 26th
and recommends approval with modifications.
they will not go over the modifications again but they
were basically what that was. >> so I'm happy to answer any
questions if you have them. Thanks.
>> okay so why don't I have miss andrews come up for
supervisor sartor now? >> hi.
thank you. Chair melgar michelle andrews
again with supervisor sadr's office supervisor sartor is
also proud to co-sponsor this important legislation to give
more options to activate vacant spaces downtown in order to
bring more people downtown we need to continue being creative
in our strategies to both bring people back to the office
and make our streets more vibrant.
this legislation is a direct response to this particular
moment that downtown is currently and as reflected by
the 2030 sunset date in it it will help us get to the 24
seven vibrant downtown that we all want to see which will
include bustling offices, retail restaurants, homes
and much more. And in the spirit of meeting
small businesses where they're at, we also want to make it as
easy as possible for businesses to operate without having to
deal with enforcement complaints for trivial things
such as having painted a sign in their window.
>> these kinds of stringent permit requirements for window
and interiors signage can make or break a small businesses
ability to succeed. So this legislation will help
reduce a significant permitting hurdle so that business owners
can focus their time on running their business.
>> thank you. Thank you.
ms. Andrews okay. Supervisor chen thank you,
chair malka I definitely also are very supportive of the
effort to create a vibrant, thriving downtown and I
understand that having more flexibility it's part of our
visions have some that have there have been some questions
about whether this legislation will allow residential unit to
be converted to other use from what I see the legislation
permit retail and non retail services above the ground floor
only in vacant commercial suits so it's not applied to
residential units. So as it stands now the city
still requires the conditional use permit to to convert a
residential unit to any other use.
>> so from what I understand, this requirement does not
change under this proposed legislation.
>> can I get a confirmation on that?
>> confirmed residential units are still subject to 317 so you
need a sue to remove them. >> wonderful.
thank you so much. >> thank you.
supervisor supervisor mahmud. Oh, I'm sorry.
of course. >> let's go to public comment
on this item. Thank you, madam chair.
land use and transportation will now hear public comment
related to agenda item number four this ordinance makes
changes to the fenestration transparency and sign
requirements. If you have public comment for
this item please come forward to the lectern at this time.
>> and madam chair to preserve the okay public comment is now
closed. >> now supervisor mahmood thank
you. I would like to make a motion
to move the amendments as described by director tang
forward for a vote. The motion offered by member
mahmud that the ordinance be amended as presented.
vice chair chen chen I remember mike when mike and I chair
melgar I melgar I madam chair there are three eyes now these
amendments are substantive. Would you like to make a motion
to. >> I'd like to move to have
this item be continued to the call.
the chair okay. On the motion offered by member
mahmood that the ordinance be continued to the call the chair
as amended. Vice chair chen chen I member
muhammad mahmood I chair melgar I melgar I madam chair there
are three eyes that motion passes thank you all okay
getting through it all now let's go to item number five
please. >> agenda item number five is
an ordinance amending the planning.
sorry ordinance amending the public works code to streamline
the approval of certain encroachments in the public
right of way to establish a registration requirement
in place of all permit requirements and fees for cafe
tables and chairs and display merchandise and to eliminate
minor encroachment permit requirements and right of way
right of way occupancy fees for a pertinent building features.
amending the planning I keep saying the planning code excuse
me amending the administrative code to exempt cafe tables
and chairs and display merchandise from the shared
spaces program in affirming the planning department secret
determination. >> thank you.
and before you present on this item director tang I want to
welcome president rafael mandal men from district eight to the
land use and transportation committee and the floor is
yours. >> thank you, chair melgar I
took the long walk down the hallway not just because I miss
seeing your smiling faces but because I absolutely am just
delighted by this legislation. It does basically two things
that I think are in many ways overdue and the only sadness
that I have is that I didn't think to make this happen at
some point in the seven year in my prior seven years on the
board. >> but that you know during
covid I remember being on lots and lots of calls as we figured
out the shared spaces legislation and during that
time we also waived table and chair fees I believe and it
and that you know went into the mists of history and I was
always sad about that. >> but this legislation sort of
poses a deeper question which is why exactly do we require
permits for this activity which is actually beneficial
and shouldn't we be getting rid of not just the fees but the
underlying permit in the first place and and so I, I think
that is fantastic. And then I also you know thank
you committee and thank you colleagues for your support of
the beyond the front door legislation and moving on from
abc. >> but again there is from that
legislation we did manage to waive one of the fees
associated with some of the work that has to get done to
make entrances accessible but the much saner and more
reasonable thing to do and the greater relief for property
owners and small businesses who who need to and have to comply
with accessibility requirements is actually to not not have
them go through this whole process with the city getting
the permit in the first place and so I love this.
>> I think this is amazing and I want to thank director
tang and the mayor and rich hillis and all the folks who've
worked on the whole package of permit s.f. But in particular I
really I really love this one and wanted to just express that
and now I will go back to my office but thanks thanks
colleagues for letting me for allowing me to gush about this
legislation when I'm of it. >> I'm so glad you got a little
bit of joy there from the landrieu's the transportation
committee president and thank you.
okay, director ting all right. >> thank you all this
excitement for tables and chairs and I also want to
acknowledge a public works department because this really
does represent a new way of doing things and we really
appreciate their collaboration on this new path forward with
tables and chairs. So on the screen here you'll
see that the current process if you want to put out tables
and chairs or also sidewalk merchandise display involves
submitting a permit application to public works department.
you also have to pay a fee the typical kind of average fee is
around $1,000 and then there's annual renewal as well.
>> you do have to submit a certificate of insurance
and also produce a pretty detailed site plan to the city.
so under the new process we would be requesting a
registration that would be done online for businesses.
there would be no fee involved .
this would really just to be getting the contact information
for the business owner in case there are any issues or
complaints that arise so that public works can contact the
business owner for those issues and then the the rules really
don't change around how you can place these tables and chairs.
they'll you know, you still have to maintain the path of
travel so that you maintain accessibility as well as
putting the tables and chairs inside and out each night.
so a lot of those those rules will not change.
the applicant would then the business owner would attest to
understanding what those operating guidelines are
and then in terms of enforcement the administrative
penalties which we are putting into such sation would accrue
or kick in essentially on the second and subsequent validated
and unaddressed violation. So we would still be giving
business owners the opportunity to understand how they can
correct whatever was not working and address them before
any admin penalties would accrue.
currently there are approximately 215 businesses
in the city that hold tables and chairs permit so that gives
you a sense of how many people will be really excited about
this as well as I'll just tell you when we're doing outreach
in the community everyone is is is super excited maybe more so
than even supervisor randleman and they can't wait for this to
take effect. >> so this will be the same
process for the sidewalk merchandise displays as well.
>> and then the other piece of this legislation has to do with
minor encroachment permits also really want acknowledge public
works department and I know alaric degraffenreid is here
in case you have any questions for public works but right now
there are a couple of things where they're very common
installations for businesses as well as mixed use buildings
that then would require them getting a minor encroachment
permit from the public works department.
some of these are shown in the photos.
I'm not sure if you can see the arrows here but they include
things like waterspouts or even gates that protrude a little
bit. They're attached to the facade
but protrude a bit into the public right away.
ada push activators so sometimes they can't be
installed directly on the facade but might have to be a
little bit right up against the building but in the public
right away. And so the legislation before
you would exempt a very specific set of items or
installations that would no longer need to obtain a minor
encroachment permit from public works department, they would
still need to have the approvals through department
building inspection so that will not go away but the
separate permit that also entails not only a fee, a one
time permit fee but also an annual assessment rate that
would that would go away under this proposed legislation.
>> some of the applications for accessibility related sidewalk
improvements can take anywhere from 6 to 12 months.
so we're really trying to again save people time and money by
avoiding getting the minor encroachment permit for these
specific items. So with that I think there is
no planning recommendation on this one.
so I'll turn it back to you. >> great.
thank you so much. >> I do not see anyone on the
roster. >> I think this is a as to to
reinforce the word president and what's that?
it's super exciting to see this and potentially transformative
so that's really great. >> let's go to public comment
on this item please. Mr. Clerk thank you madam chair
. Land use and transportation
will now hear public comment related to agenda item number
five cafe tables and chairs. If you have public comment for
this item we have a table set up for you.
>> no one's here for public comment.
madam chair public comment is now closed and supervisor what
mode would you like to move this motion to?
>> I like to make a motion to send this item to the full
board. The positive recommendation
motion offered by a member mahmud that the ordinance be
recommended to the board of supervisors on that motion vice
chair chen chen I am member mahmood I moved I chair melgar
I melgar I madam chair there are three eyes okay thank you.
>> I think supervisor and garcia wanted to be here
for the next item. >> item number six but he's not
here so why don't we go ahead and present?
>> would you like me to call item number six, madam chair?
>> yes, go ahead. Agenda item number six is an
ordinance amending the planning code to streamline and simplify
the process for obtaining and extending temporary use
authorizations or implement standard requirements for any
temporary use authorization and permit as temporary uses.
seasonal political campaign offices for up to one year
and extend the maximum time period for a pop up retail
temporary use to three years. It affirms the planning
department secret determinations and makes
findings of consistency with the general plan and planning
code section 302 okay. Welcome again to director.
all right. Sorry this is the last one
you'll hear from me as part of the permit s.f. Legislative
package. This one has to do with
temporary use authorizations. And our goal here is really to
simplify and clarify pop ups and temporary use that you can
engage in currently under the planning code you'll see here
on the far right graphic there about 19 different categories.
so it can be a little bit confusing about which category
you should fit under. So really our goal here is to
consolidate simplify I we want to clarify what retail pop up
use actually means and I think expand it a little bit as well
. And also we I don't know if you
want to pause and continue. >> all right.
we also want to better clarify the duration that each of these
two a's is temporary use authorizations can be in place
for as well as the maximum amount of total time.
so for example, if you had to renew a pop up use and so
examples of where a temporary use authorizations are helpful
and I know super is supervisor and engardio just joined but
the outer sunset farmer's market is one example where it
takes place in an r h one district where typically retail
sales and service cannot occur and so that is a very useful
tool to have a temporary use authorization for that.
and we have a photo here of of gumbo as well and they were
able to open up sorry gumbo social and they were able to
open up shop over on third street after having popped up
many times at the outer sunset farmer's market and still do so
that's been a great outcome of the t v usage there as many
businesses like to test out concepts before they then go
ahead and open up their own brick and mortar location.
so I think that is it and then I'll turn it over to aaron star
for the planning department recommendation.
>> mr. Start, before you come up I just want to welcome at
district bourse and sponsor this legislation as supervisor
joel and engardio supervisor would you like to say a few
words before I bring mr. Starr up?
>> sure. Thank you.
I just want to say that I obviously wholeheartedly
support this and hope to have your support for the mayor's
efforts for permit stuff. And just I want to add katie
had mentioned or director tang had mentioned about some pop
ups that were successful. Another one smokin d's got
their start at the farmer's market and they then did a they
did a booth at this at the night market and now there are
brick and mortar on irving street so which is wonderful.
so I just want to see more of that.
they have lines out the door so it's a good success story.
>> thank you. Supervisor okay now mr. Starr
thank you. I think the planning commission
heard this on june 26th and recommended approval.
I will note that this absolves you of the sin of being not
in compliance at the planning code all of your political
offices were illegal and so this legalizes I am happy to
answer any questions. >> thanks.
mine was in my garage so all right.
thank you so much at let's go to public comment on this item
please. >> thank you madam chair.
land use and transportation will now hear public comment
related to agenda item number six if you have public comment
for this item please come forward to the lectern at this
time and it appears we have no speakers.
>> madam chair okay with that public comment is now closed.
supervisor mahmood I'd like to send this make a motion to send
this item to the full board with a positive recommendation
on the motion offered by member mark moved that the ordinance
be recommended to the board of supervisors vice chair 1010 I
remember when mahmood I chair melgar I melgar I madam chair
there are three eyes okay thank you.
>> that motion passes. >> okay thank you.
we got that through that pretty quickly.
thank you so much. Team let's go to item number
eight please. >> you want to go to eight or
number seven? Sorry seven two want to skip
one and item number seven is an ordinance amending the planning
code to provide conditions for repairing relocation of
existing complying structures within required yards grant
unpermitted residential structures within yards that
were constructed before 23 non complying status and allow
accessory structures up to ten feet in height and 120ft2
within required yards amending the building code to exempt
accessory structures up to 120ft2 from building permits
affirming the planning department secret determination
and making findings of consistency with the general
plan and findings of necessity, convenience and welfare.
>> thank you so much. We have the sponsor of the
legislation supervisor and engardio here with us
supervisor card you may remember that my story was
in the paper when I tried to put a pergola in my backyard
and I couldn't figure out what the requirements were.
I couldn't figure out what the requirements were.
>> it's pretty confusing. So thank you so much for doing
this and the floor is yours. >> thank you.
good afternoon chair melgar, members chair and mahmud.
this legislation was born of the frustration that even the
chair melgar felt and many district four residents who I
represent who are dealing with lots of headaches when they
decide to improve or fix their long standing accessory yard
structures on the west side. I know many homeowners that
have backyard garden sheds, decks and stairways and these
structures have existed for decades without inspections
complaints or stamped permits. But the moment a homeowner
decides to start on a basic improvement project, they're
required to navigate our complex building and planning
codes and this can be a daunting experience and one
that could cost months of delays, thousands of dollars or
critical life safety issues. And in subsequent conversations
with planning staff I learned this issue was not limited to
those living in single family homes.
it's a ubiquitous challenge faced by building owners across
the whole city. So imagine receiving a notice
of violation for a year or rear yard encroachment that puts a
home renovation project on hold or halts the reconstruction of
a crucial emergency exit stairway for tenants.
it should not have to be this way and you shouldn't be
required to have a law degree to know what can and cannot be
done with your a year rear yard.
so we need to make the government less confusing
and more accessible to regular residents and a simple home
improvement project like a storage shed, a deck or
renovation of a sunroom should not require a public hearing.
countless hours of navigating code building and planning
staff or the prospect of steep fines and penalties.
so this legislation intends to clarify what people can do with
their rear yards. I want to thank exemplary
planning staff audra maloney, corey teague and deputy city
attorney rob coppola for their thoughtful collaboration with
my office on this legislation. I also want to thank liz waddy
and mayor lori staff for incorporating this into the
mayor's permit initiative. We all know yards are valuable
open spaces and I know staff diligently explored every
possible project scenario to ensure the right controls
remained in place to protect these spaces.
and with that and with that I would like to discuss the scope
of planning staff's requested legislative amendments.
so requested amendment number one amend section 136c23 to
clarify that detached structures allowed in yards may
not contain sleeping quarters. Requested amendment number to
allow non-compliant structures to be relocated so they retain
their original setback distance rather than requiring a new
one. Allow for the installation of
new fire rated walls without requiring a variance as they
are usually at or directly adjacent to property lines.
requested amendment number three strike the variance
application refund provision and that's it.
these amendments are not yet ready to be introduced so I
will request the chair motion to continue this item until the
land use meeting on monday july 14th.
>> so thank you chair melgar and members of the committee.
thank you supervisor and engardio.
>> I will make a motion to to continue it to the call of the
chair because I'm not sure what that meeting looks like and I
dare not do it outside of jen those that purview and can I
just ask ms.. Maloney a question?
what is when we exempt a sleeping quarters what does
that mean? >> thank you.
chair melgar audrey maloney a planning department staff
sleeping quarters essentially is our way of being able to put
an enforcement mechanism into the idea that we do not want
these to become dwelling units. So the term that we chose was
sleeping quarters. A similar term is used in the
state building code. We're essentially just trying
to make sure that if a complaint is filed about
somebody sleeping in one of these accessory structures we
have something that states what qualifies and what doesn't
qualify. Sleeping quarters felt like a
fairly understandable term to us so that we can go out
and enforce against there being beds in these places where
people are actually sleeping overnight.
>> yeah I understand that but how about like a hammock or you
know I'm jewish in the fall we do so and we sleep out there.
you know that one night. So I'm wondering what's who
assesses that and what what is that lately?
yes. Well our enforcement is not
perfect with anything that is alleged to be an illegal
dwelling unit. However, if you had something
where somebody sleeps out there once or twice a year or more
but essentially they're not living out there, we want to
make sure it's clear that this is not to be used as a dwelling
unit and so in theory somebody could a neighbor who sees
somebody sleeping out there even if it's on occasion could
file a complaint and our enforcement planners would ask
to conduct a site inspection and if there were more
permanent sleeping quarters visible in the accessory
structure, we would require that those be removed.
>> but a hammock out there would not a hammock would not
be considered a sleeping structure.
okay. Thank you so much, ms..
maloney and thank you supervisor and engardio.
I don't see any other questions or comments from my colleagues
. Let's go to public comment on
this item and then I'll make the motion to continue it.
>> thank you madam chair. Land use and transportation
will now hear public comment related to agenda item number
seven if you have public comment for this item please
come forward selectman and you may begin.
>> eileen bogan coalition for san francisco neighborhoods
speaking on my own behalf concurring with the committee
to continue this item. This item was heard at the
planning commission just last week with both the sponsor
and his chief of staff present in person.
last week's planning commission hearing had 23 items and lasted
seven hours. >> item 23 was the zoning
hearing. However, this item was item
number 17 having this minor code correction which was
clearly non-urgent on a packaging and could be seen as
abuse of discretion. Here we are just four four days
later with this minor and non-urgent legislation on
the land use and transportation committee agenda shows four
days before the 4th of july holiday.
this could also be seen as abuse of discretion even for
this minor legislation. >> there are issues on page
three line 11 the text should read one half bathrooms not
bathrooms. >> this is just one of the
issues. >> to be clear, this
legislation will not change the narrative in district four as
caesar said when he crossed the rubicon, the die is cast.
>> thank you. We have any further comments
for agenda item number seven? >> okay public comment on this
item is now closed. >> I'd like to make a motion
that we continue this item to the call of the chair please on
the motion offered by the chair that the ordinance be continued
to the call. The chair first chair chin chin
I member marchman. Mahmood I chair melgar I alker
I madam chair there are three eyes okay thank you.
and now let's go to item number eight please.
mr. Clerk. >> agenda item number eight is
an ordinance amending the planning and subdivisions codes
to allow separate conveyance of certain accessory dwelling
units and a sociate in primary residences as condominiums.
it affirms the planning's planning department secret
determination makes findings of consistency with a general plan
and adopts findings of public necessity, convenience
and welfare. >> thank you so much again
welcome supervisor and garcia the floor is yours.
>> thank you. Thank you again chair melgar
and supervisors since I was last here on this item april
21st my office has been in consultation with
stakeholders and advocates. It's always been my goal to
make sure this legislation does nothing to lessen existing
tenant protections while also creating opportunities to add
infill housing within our neighborhoods.
colleagues I would like to request the committee make the
following amendment to this legislation on page 14 line six
strike this line entirely which reads or no certificate of
occupancy has been issued for the adu.
it's my understanding this amendment is not substantive
but I defer to deputy city attorney brad russi to confirm
and thank you chair melgar and members of the committee.
I hope to have your support on this amendment and to send this
item as a committee report to the full board with
recommendation. >> thank you supervisor
and engardio and miss maloney did you have a presentation?
can you tell us what the planning commission did?
>> absolutely that we did present on this on the 21st but
I'd be happy to give you a summary.
generally the planning commission recommended a host
of amendments that were made to the ordinance and we thank the
supervisor for doing so. The amendments were generally
within the ilk of trying to make sure that we were not
displacing any tenants and that we were protecting unauthorized
dwelling units. Would you like me to break down
the amendments that the commission recommended?
>> sure. Great.
so at that hearing in february the commission recommended one
to limit the program to existing single family homes
and existing condominiums that are proposing to construct a
new detached you through the state program.
secondly, to limit the program to new construction, single
family homes and new construction condominium
projects proposing to construct a detached or attached to you
through the state program. The second recommended
modification was to move the state mandated requirements to
the subdivision code. The third was to make several
clarifying amendments. The first was to clarify that
an application to construction at a you may be submitted
concurrently with the condominium application and the
second is to clarify that eligible 80 use and their
primary units must meet the same planning code standards
that are applied to all other condominium conversion projects
so that section 1383 of the subdivision code.
and again I believe that the second version of the
legislation incorporates the spirit of those amendments as
they were written to the record.
>> okay. Thank you so much, ms..
maloney and I see that vice chair chen has some comments.
I will just say thank you supervisor and engardio for
your work on this. >> as you know the family
special use family and senior housing special use district
that was passed by this board two years ago allows for
subdivision of 80 use and I think that this is consistent
you know to have you know, this option for property owners as
well. I appreciate your work on it.
my concern was that it be standardized so that folks, you
know, know what to expect depending on the regime that
they choose. So with that I just thank you,
ms.. Maloney, for all of your work
on it and for making sure that we are following the spirit of
what we're trying to do. Supervisor chen, thank you,
chair malka thank you. >> supervising gadiel I do
support this with our goal of this legislation is to
incentivize the production of addus especially
in neighborhood character raised by single family homes
which is also district 11. We have 62% homeownership.
>> the legislation also provides a pathway to enable
single home families to recoup their investment when they
construct a new rtu and increase the supply of
additional entry level housing units.
with that I also want to thank you for that effort and I also
really appreciate that we further look into it that we do
not undermine tenant provisions.
so and I really appreciate you assure that this is not this is
also our goal. >> and I also continue to want
to make sure that we incorporate amendments as
requested by the community and that will ensure that
tenant protection during the process of all this adu condo
conversions are all comply and thank you so much for your
effort and making more what we call house rich cash poor
community have more options and thank you thank you
supervisor chen so you know the reason why we had included the
possibility to do subdivisions and the family and senior study
was because you know in addition to the to the
reasons that you listed supervisor chen to recoup your
investment and to allow for more affordability of for
property owners and there is also the possibility of
subdivide subdividing and also passing on a property to your
heir as while you're alive which has some tax segment
significant tax advantages. And so it does present a way
for families to you know, hang on to generational wealth
particularly in neighborhoods that have been excluded from
that which such as you know, district 11 and other
neighborhoods that have low incomes but high homeownership
rates like, you know, excels your bayview.
so I think this is a good thing at supervise as well.
let's let's go to public comment because I do have an
amendment as well that I have spoken with with a supervisor.
so with that, mr. Clerk, let's go to public comment on this
item. >> thank you, madam chair.
land use and transportation will now hear public comment on
agenda item number eight related to condominium
conversion of accessory dwelling units.
and I do want to mention one thing that I failed to mention
when I was calling this item but and gado did pointed out
and that is that this item is on our agenda as a potential
committee report and it may be considered by the board of
supervisors tomorrow july 1st, 2025.
>> for speaker please. Good afternoon I'm mitchell I'm
member with the affordable housing alliance in the san
francisco anti displacement coalition.
two issues in two minutes. The first is we raised some
time ago which is that we would like to protect tenants who
rent single family homes and we would also like to protect
tenants who live in addus where the subdivision may not happen
concurrent with the construction of them.
for that reason we had suggested that the applicant
owner applying for the subdivision and be an applicant
owner for three continuous years which is in fact what we
provide for in every other condo conversion in san
francisco would that wouldn't seem like to be a tall order
since we're talking about long term house rich cash poor
people three years should be pretty easy to meet and would
provide some protection for tenants so I appreciate working
on that particular concept with supervisor chan we're
disappointed that we don't have support on the committee for
that at this time but we do intend to follow up with it
in the future so that these conversions can be parallel to
all the other conversions. >> the second issue is a new
new language that we first saw at 7 p.m. Last wednesday when
we saw all this at that point. So it's been kind of a hurry up
and rush and stop and go and it's a little frustrating
but this is that there's new language on page 19 I think
it's line four that says that these 80 new conversions will
be exempt from every other than the enumerated sections of
article nine. >> that's really a lot of stuff
that's really overbroad. There are stuff in article nine
that we just need administratively like the
application and and what if the application is denied the
process to appeal and various other things like that?
there's also stuff in article nine that clearly is not
applicable so we don't you wouldn't even need that but
that needs to be looked at. That is kind of a big deal.
so I appreciate you taking a look at that at this 11th hour
and there I go. >> thank you.
thank you for your comments to the next speaker place eileen
bogan coalition for san francisco neighborhood speaking
on my own behalf, I would like to concur with the previous
speaker. It's my understanding there was
very little outreach to organizations such as his on
this and they just received the amended copy last wednesday.
so I'm urging that the item be continued and also that it not
be heard tomorrow as a committee report.
I don't see the rush on it and the that there are is new
language in there that was about article nine that was not
in their original lee and that they have really not had the
time to review so I agree again with mr. Berg that this item is
not quite ready for prime time and I would urge it be
continued and not be heard tomorrow as a committee report.
>> thank you. Thank you for your comments.
next speaker please. >> hi, good afternoon
supervisors. My name is brandon but I live
with the housing action coalition as their community
organizer and I'm really just here to express my support for
this legislation and thank supervisor and guardian and all
of the supervisors and planning staff that have put in a lot of
time into this really practical thoughtful plan kind of
speaking for myself as a young person who had lived in san
francisco for ten years and had to leave due to the short
housing options that were available to me, I would love
to see a more complex and abundant variety of housing
options especially in places where there hasn't been that
variety I had. >> I can I've tried for years
and years to live on the west side of san francisco and it
ended up not being realistic for me.
but I was able to you know, like so many other san
francisco residents live in someone's house and have a
separator by by a sheet and people living in the living
room. >> and I think that doesn't
always work for people and there's lots of families
and individuals that would like to see more housing options
especially when the opportunity of home ownership is on the
table. I did not think that I would be
able to move towards that option personally and so I'm
really excited to be able to sit here and and support
something that brings that option closer to reality.
>> so we really hope to see more of those varieties of
housing options in the future and really appreciate the
thoughtfulness in terms of making sure that tenants are
not displaced and tenant protections and to see the
conversations keep happening so that we get closer to that
healthier ecosystem in san francisco.
>> thank you. Thank you for your comments.
do we have any further comment or is for agenda item number
eight? Okay.
public comment on this item is now closed.
>> colleagues, I just wanted to address a couple of things that
we heard from public comment. The first one is about the look
back and you know I have had lots of conversations with mr.
omar berg and folks in the tenants rights groups.
I think the issue for me is that there are separate look
back requirements in different legislation and different.
some of it is in the condo conversion ordinance.
some of it is in the act that we passed a couple of years ago
and as we are looking at all of the legislation that is coming
through with the rezoning of high resource area, there's
going to be yet another. So I would rather wait on that
until we can have like one standard way of doing it that
doesn't advantage the state program over our local program
or you know, it has unintended consequences which is why, you
know, I am reluctant to support that today.
as to the other issue which is what mr. I remember talked
about starting in line to page 19 in the sentence are any 80
use subject to conversion all the way down to line six to
dwelling units. I am wondering how you would
feel supervisor and you about just striking that whole
paragraph out altogether for I think it's already approved out
as to form without it because it's been added since
wednesday. So if that's okay that would be
a non substantive amendments as we're striking it out and that
would just take care of that issue.
>> yep I agree with that. That sounds fine.
>> okay mr. Rusty, what do you think about that?
deputy city attorney brad russell yes, that amendment has
been prepared and I'm I can sign off on that and it would
be non substantive. I actually had one question for
supervisor regarding guardian. >> I know you mentioned the
amendment striking on page 14 line six or no certificate of
occupancy has been issued for the adu I believe you mentioned
that one. There was another amendment
that I think was included and for today which is on page
and on line nine of that same page.
>> oh I see under little eye is constructed after january 1st
2020. >> I believe that there's also
an amendment for today. I'm sorry I missed that so I
read that. So line nine where it says is
constructed after january 1st, 2020, right?
>> yeah. That's also those two
amendments are not substantive and they can move forward
today. >> thank you.
I think ms. Maloney did, yes. >> okay.
thank you mr. Omar burke that that paragraph includes a bunch
of rights and it's new language here that protects their tenant
protections referencing 1396 eight sorry 1387 1390 1391,
1392 and 1383. Those are actually rights for
tenants in these buildings that were one of the things that we
discussed in the letter from the 80 you the language that is
problematic really is just that are just line four and no other
provisions of this article that's the language that's so
overbroad and problematic. >> okay.
so you what you are actually recommending is that we strike
out starting at the comma after 1393.
>> yes. The words and no other
provisions of article nine of this code that's what's so
overbroad in what about after the period I will defer to the
sponsor because I don't think that's problematic but that's
because we're trying to address several different situations
here in this legislation existing single family homes or
the new adu. But we're also addressing
existing condominiums and I want to add an ad or new condo.
okay. >> yeah.
thank you supervisor and engardio.
yes. So it sounds like we're keeping
the lines on page 19 lines four through six and we're striking
no other provisions of this code.
>> deputy city attorney brad rusty, I would suggest that
perhaps we instead say these and any to you subject to
conversion under this section is subject to article nine of
this code because I think that the intention is that all the
requirements of article nine apply to these conversion
sites. What I'm hearing and by calling
out those specific sections it might imply that the other ones
aren't included, aren't well it it says that that's what it's
basically it says no other provisions of article nine
and I'm not sure why we would do that right so I concurred.
keep it simple and just as you said, deputy city attorney
and so okay so we're since we're doing this on the fly any
80 you subject to conversion under this section 1390 6.8
shall be subject to article nine of this code.
okay. And is that approved as to form
I can approve that as to form right now.
okay great. Okay.
mr. Amberg is that acceptable? >> yeah.
yeah. I mean it should be great to be
able to read it and it's make sure it's really saying what we
wanted to say it's six words shall be subject to article
nine shall be subject to this to article nine.
yeah okay that sounds sounds good is my way of doing
business but okay okay I've never done this before but
former chair supervisor aaron peskin did it all the time on
the fly so I'm channeling ms.. >> maloney.
I'm so sorry chair mugger I just wanted to make sure that
not being an expert in the administrative code but that
the language no other provision of article nine of this code I
wonder if there is some other conflicting provision of
article nine that this was trying to avoid.
>> that's I just wanted to bring that up.
okay. Thanks mr. Sc I think I spoke
with the attorney who drafted this today and I thought the
intention about of these amendments was to remove this
section entirely which would have resulted and these
conversions being subject to article nine and in its
entirety. Yeah that was the amendment
that was proposed initially by a supervisor and gardner but I
think for clarifying purposes if you want to you know
accommodate the advocates here, I think it's achieving the same
thing right? >> which is what I proposed but
just to restate it, if we were to remove it all together it
would everything would be subject to article nine.
but we are super clarifying it by specifically saying any use
subject to conversion under this section 1390 6.8 shall be
subject to article nine. Right.
okay. Right.
is that acceptable? >> all right.
so I'd like to make a motion that we amend the legislation
as just stated and the amendments that were read into
the record by supervisor and engardio reflecting the
modifications that were recommended by the planning
commission and then that we move the legislation as amended
as a committee report to the full board with a positive
recommendation a >> motion has been offered by the chair that
the ordinance be amended as presented and then further
amended through discussion that we've had here and then
recommended as amended as a committee report for
consideration on tomorrow's agenda july 1st, 2025 on that
motion vice chair chin chin I member marchman mahmud I chair
I melgar I madam chair there are three eyes thank you that
motion passes congratulations supervisor and engardio do we
have any other items on our agenda today?
>> mr. Clerk there's no further business.
>> okay. We are now adjourned.
thank you