Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Land Use Committee 20210316

difficult timeline of getting all the ballots measures on the ballot, getting them heard properly, and the work of the clerk's staff to monitor several committees simultaneously, and wanting to make sure that there aren't mistakes made getting measures on the ballot, i felt like it would be easier and more appropriate to take away those measures from a third committee by putting the stress on the clerk of the board to have to monitor three committees, perhaps create special committees. it's just too much. it's just too much to ask. [please stand by] . >> chairman: why don't we go to public comment on this -- oh, i'm sorry supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: i was just thinking about how do we move this important agenda forward making sure that our clerk can do the best that they can, you know, that they can to really meet our goals and needs and this is really a critical piece. i really, again, just given what we have been through in the last ten months as families and with just all the issues just be it from low income families in need of meals during this pandemic to the digital divide to just re-opening schools and all these issues impacting our kids and families and your thoughtfulness about structuring this and we really focus our issues and time and resources to be able to address these critical issues and making sure there's a connection between what is happening with our kids in the school districts or even our private schools with the board and what the board can do and what the city can do. so i am definitely in support of your efforts on this and your amendments today and i just wanted to be able to say that out loud and also to cosponsor this just amendmenting this today so thank you. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor chan. and, with that, why don't we go to public comment. are there any comments on item 5? >> clerk: yes. please call 415655-0001. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. at this time, we have two in line for public comment to speak on this matter. first speaker, please >> good afternoon now supervisors. calvin quick calling in. the youth commission as the legislation referred to us on march 1st and we wholeheartedly support this legislation to really appreciate supervisor ronen for her staff and we had a great discussion about ways that the board and youth commission can work together and how really excited. and so i just want to go over a couple of recommendations for us to go over this together. as one option that we looked through. a few other things having a youth from or recommended by the youth commission or standing item to report issue importance to youth and youth activities to the commission. also, if possible, haves the committee be held during youth accessible times after school. we know that's potentially an issue, but the clerk and so if a potential work around given that the sort of jurisdiction of this committee and youth commission are very similar, having any legislation referred to from this youth committee also to the commission holding it at 5:00 p.m. on mondays and having that opportunity for youth input on legislation that is by nature going to be affecting youth and families. and, then having youth commission have a standing item on the new committee agenda to report back to the committee on any youth input. so we'd love to continue this discussion. [inaudible] >> chairman: next speaker, please. next speaker. >> chairman: hello, caller. you may be on mute. you may begin your comment. caller, if you're on the line, you may begin. the caller may not be listening to us at this time. operations, do we have any additional callers? that completes our public comment list. okay. public comment is closed and i would like to move the amendments that supervisor ronen read into the record. that motion, mr. clerk, a roll call please. >> clerk: [roll call] >> clerk: the motion is amended without objections. >> chairman: and, then i'd like to make a motion to send the item to the board with recommendation. i apologize, we got notice too late or somehow it got lost in translation to send it as a community report. it will go before the board at our following board meeting next week. my apologies. >> i forgot to thank paul moanhay of my office who had been working with calvin at the youth commission to make sure they're deeply involved in that. >> chairman: paul, you are officially thanked. on the motion to move the item as amended to the full board with positive recommendation. roll call, please. >> clerk: on that motion [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor ronen. take care down there and next item please. >> clerk: next on the agenda is item number 6. resurrection pursuant to item 4.113. construction of an observation wheel structure in golden gate park for a term starting february 28, two thousand twenty, and lasting for one year follow the current permit expiration term, with full removal march 15, 2022. >> chairman: thank you, clerk young. we heard this on the adoption without the reference calendar at our last board of supervisors meeting where we got plenty of public comment but thought that we should give an opportunity for more public comment in a more robust discussion and that is what is before us today. the resolution speaks for itself. with that, i will turn it over to the district one supervisor whose district encompasses golden gate park who i have not been able to speak to since last tuesday about this item. supervisor chan and i are in a quorum with that. supervisor chan, the floor is yours. >> supervisor chan: thank you, supervisor peskin. i really appreciate this resolution that is coming before us because i think that this resolution really brought to sort of the conversation a series of conversations that we have been having in the last few weeks really about golden gate park as a historic park and how we really should be care for this park. this will specifically brought to my attention really started off with some of the environmental concerns that my constituents have and that's including the light of the wheel and the noise and just how it obstructed the view on a ground level when park visitors are visiting the area. in all of those, with also under the impression that this was going to be a temporary installation of this structure now known as the observation wheel in honor of the golden gate park's 150th anniversary. and, obviously, because of the pandemic, so many of our activities and planned celebration like even chinese new year were on pause in 2020 and continued -- some continued even until 2021. knowing that the golden gate park celebration -- 150th celebration was paused because of the pandemic, i thought that, you know, with this wheel, that was the intent -- that was what the wheel was intended for perhaps that it could stay for another year, but with the condition that we mitigate light, the lighting and the noise and the generator issues. and here's also why i think that the board should step in to exercise this authority to install whether we go allow this structure to stay for another year. you know, the golden gate park has transformed quite a bit to the soccer to now the $20 million tennis court and also in the last decade there were lighting ceremonies throughout the park including conservatory of flowers. the park really has transformed for some view it as better, for some to view it as just different. and i want to go back to some of the concerns that my constituents have raised about wild life, some of these issues that i do agree, you know. maybe just a light of the wheel itself doesn't really in a temporary fashion, perhaps it's only a temporary impact but collectively the lighting at the wheel, the lighting of the tennis court, the lighting of the holiday tree, now with the lighting of the wheel for another four years and then some really create a question of whether this is environmentally friendly. how does it really impact our wild life in golden gate park? that was really initially my thought when i expressed my concern about the wheel. now, as i kind of dig deeper, you know, another issue spurred up for me. however, i do think that there are other ways to address this other issue that, you know, came to my attention really specifically on the contract of this wheel. and, let me be very clear about this resolution. while this resolution whatever that may happen today at this committee and whatever that this committee may decide to do with this piece of resolution and even if it were to go to full bore for a vote even if this committee agree for it to move forward, let me be very clear about the contract and some of the questions that now i've learned about and will raise and continue to raise in this. i would not give up on this issue just knowing, you know, whether whatever happened with this resolution, i really now have identified issues around this contract. the fact that the revenue generated from the wheel is going to a nonprofit that has been under and part of an ongoing public corruption investigation. and, in question and when asked about it -- about this contract to an extent is to cover the n now disgraced former head of public works was able to exact money from corporations like recog and stash it in that same organization which is a little akin in my mind to a swiss bank that is doing business with some very questionable entities. but with that, if supervisor mandelman has no comment, why don't we go to public comment. mr. young, why don't we open this up to public comment. >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting id is 1875577823. then press pound and pound again. if you haven't already done so please dial star 3 to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you begin your comment. we have 75 listeners and 29 callers at this time. >> chairman: first speaker, please. and, colleagues, in so far as i am supposed to join the land use committee in an hour, would you be okay -- i hate cutting public comment down. but if we can cut it down to a minute and a half, i will have a chance of joining that and i have amendments to the items at land use at 1:30. so, mr. young, if we can have it to a minute and a half per speaker or i might have to turn the gavel over to vice chairmandelman. >> clerk: normally we cut it to one minute or 2 minutes. >> i am sure that 90 seconds is fine. >> clerk: okay. we will time it for 90 seconds. >> chairman: i apologize for cutting down public comment, but that's what mondays look like. okay. first speaker please. >> eilene bogan. i am concurring with this resolution. extending this contract by one year due to covid related issues is more than fair. and supervisor chan has stated in the media, while we all can agree, anti-corruption and good government policies are of utmost importance. extending the contract by one year rather than four years avoids the perception of the privatization of public assets. an example of this was the privatization of public assets with professional soccer at kizar stadium. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is jackie flynn, and i am the executive director of the institute of san francisco also known as apri. apri serves thousands of low income families across the city primary live engine the southeast sector of the city, and, for decades, we've provided community programs that engage and educate voters around all type of civic issues. we also support job seekers with multiple barriers to employment and provide life inspiring experiences to youth, supporting their career, dreams, and aspirations. i'm here because i'm in support of the four-year extension that allows the observation wheel to remain in place until 2025. i hear the concerns about the environmental impact and i would really like everyone to consider the social impact. i would like to express. and i want to humbly show concern because this effort seems to be surprisingly proposed after being unanimously supported by historic preservation as well as the rec and park commission. on both of those meetings, i observed residents in my community in support of the full four-year extension. i ask you to consider the voices of the bayview community to allow families and children an opportunity to experience the observation wheel. in addition, i'd like to just state that over the last year during the pandemic, our rec and parks department has strengthened their community relationships providing safe and healthy spaces for our families to continue to thrive despite social challenges this time has been exacerbated over the last year. >> clerk: thank you. we have the next caller, please. >> clerk: hello, caller, you can proceed with public comment. >> hello, my name is mickey nixon. i am calling to support the four-year extension of the farris wheel. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is don franklin and i'm the president of the parks chapter of spiu and i'm in full support of going on with what has been recommended by both the rec and park commission to move this as soon as possible. the vendor does provide 500 free tickets a month that my co-workers actually go and take these kids to the farris wheel. the wheel's a good thing for the recovery of the city. it brings in tourism, it brings in revenue. revenue to our department means jobs as far as our needed folks who work with these kids, we need more revenue and more jobs. this was overwhelmingly supported by the sf chamber of commerce. and in order to keep the recovery going, we've got to have revenue. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. i'd just like to make a quick statement before we move on to the next caller. i'd just like to say that public comment for this item is being taken today and will not be taken again when it appears on the board of supervisors agenda and the committee report scheduled for tomorrow. can we have the next caller, please. >> chair peskin, vice chair mandelman. i'm a board chair for the richmond district ymca. i'm here today to state my strong support for the four-year extension for the farris wheel in golden gate park which i know was unanimously approved by the historic preservation commission and the rec and park commission which each heard extensive arguments of the like made by supervisor chan. i'm acutely aware of the pressures covid-19 has placed on families and kids in the city. this wheel will attract families to the park, the revenue will support the park going on into the future and it will also support richland merchants and businesses near the park. i strongly urge you to extended wheel in the park for four years. thank you so much for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is kevin carol. iep the president and ceo of the hotel council of san francisco i'm also a resident of san francisco myself. i'm calling in support of the existing agreement and approval that's gone to a vote the historic preservation commission and rec and park to extend the farris wheel for four years and proposed the one-year extension that's being heard today by your committee. the farris wheel is something that will definitely help with our recovery of the city. the recovery is going to be long-term and by allowing this to go through with the current approval that it has for four years will bring back visitors and residents to san francisco and also help promote our city. so i ask that you don't move forward with the proposed one-year extension and recognize and approve the four-year that was already approved before you. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi. i'm a district 3 resident. i oppose the extension of the sky star wheel in golden gate park and oppose the sky star wheel being in golden gate park at all because the life negatively impacts. migrating birds and bats, nesting owls and great blue herons. these connect people to our eco system. i appreciate the san francisco board of supervisors approving the resolution in 2018. this wheel conflicts with this bio diversity resolution and conflicts with the healthy eco system and bio diversity goals. when our wild life population is so reduced as to not be able to reproduce, the eco system that feeds us and gives us the oxygen to breathe is destroyed. golden gate park is one of the rare spaces in san francisco that does large enough to permit more of our wild life to produce. the wheeled diesel generator is complete opposite of the work. at a minimum, the diesel generator and all the lights must set off at sunset. the contractual issues are reprehensible. the city of san francisco does not get the revenue from this wheel. the vendor and a nonprofit get the revenue. please remove this sky star wheel permanently from golden gate park as soon as possible. my comments are complete. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next speaker, please. >> my name is verdict ron can oliva. i'm a native san franciscan, and like many san franciscans, i have a long history with golden gate park. i care about what happens to it and in it. i'm calling this morning to say the st. louis wheel as i like to think of it does not belong in golden gate park. it belongs in an amusement park. your vote to limit the wheel and always open to you is a vote to protect the park that is the treasured respite of the people you represent. we are relying on you to make your decision based on fact. and the facts are that golden gate park is indeed our refuge from the noise and lights and stresses inherent in city living. however, the park is this refuge precisely and only because there is an environment healthy enough to support wild life. the wheel disrupts the life cycles of that wildlife from insects to mammals to birds. and in that very process, the wheel steals the refuge that the golden gate park is for us, your constituents, including for those among us who can't afford to leave the city. the facts also include our duty to know and understand the purpose for the creation of golden gate park -- >> clerk: your time is up. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello, supervisors. this is david. i would like to share my comments about the wheel in golden gate park. worth noting by the golden gate park. the original contract was approved by one year but has been open only two years due to covid-19. i'm trying to support the expansion of the wheel. i'm an ice cream truck owner and the business has been in the golden gate park for almost nine years. because of the pandemic, it was a strong impact to all the businesses. but, when the wheel opened during the pandemic, the business operationally got better. it attracted people to the golden gate park to drive business and get more sales. in other words, the wheel's helping the businesses to get recovered from the pandemic. i believe it's really important for the local businesses for the businesses around golden gate park. for this reason, i hope the wheel can stay in the golden gate park for longer. please take consideration for it. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, this is phillip calling in support as well of the extension of the sky star wheel in golden gate park for four years. this is a critical element of the golden gate park 150th celebration that's been mentioned that has not been able to follow through on its plan, but, beyond that, it's a critical park of the enjoyment of the park for 500 youth and families per month as part of this plan as the caller previously mentioned. and, as a way to bring -- and brings in a destination within the park that's focused on culture, family, and connections to the broader city. thank you for allowing me to comment. i support the four years strongly. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller? >> hello, supervisors. can you all hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> yes. i'd like to thank supervisor peskin, chan, and mandelman. i am a member of district 8 and a newly volunteer member of the park alliance and i support the four-year extension. i do hear and understand some of the concerns that were mentioned, but i would like to say that golden gate park is large enough to accommodate all the values of san francisco including families in item 5. you mentioned how important it is to bring families back and this gives families the opportunity especially during a time in covid to give our families and youth an opportunity to come out, enjoy the outdoors and to experience a greater community outing out there. also, we've heard from labor who supports it for jobs. community based organizations who've phoned and joined the support. i ask you that you move forward with the four-year extension and allow the familyings of san francisco to be able to experience multiple different aspects of living in the city. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi. i'm calling in. i'm a long-term resident of district 4. i support the compromise, thank you, supervisor chan and peskin. i actually believe in science. i'm an environmentalist. it is the environmental groups that are the experts. all of them have chimed in about how this wheel will hurt the very land for the birds, the sierra club. i think it's a fair compromise, the one year as that satisfies all parties and i think it's sad that we have to argue with the leaders of our parks to keep out things like this or put real grass in the ground in the parks and we're going more and more into those kinds of arguments rather than being on the same side on things. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am kelly nice. i'm a resident of district 2 and i own a business in district 3. i'm a proud board member where i have served for over 20 years on the parks alliance which helps make san francisco a more livable space and have for over 50 years. for the last 20 years, we've helped raise over $20 million to improve san francisco parks and open spaces. supervisor chan is a former parks and rec employee and knows well this contract was improved. i'm absolutely in favor of the four-year extension for the wheel. we need the tourism, the entertainment options, the jobs, and income. it's unique and fun and brings people to the park. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. my name is joyce armstrong. i'm president of the public housing tenant association better known as phta. i'm calling to give my support for the four-year extension to support park and rec and what we're planning to do to bring back -- to strengthen our economy and help this city recover from covid. i'm in strong support. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> my name is brian kennedy. i produce special events here in san francisco. i am in full support of extending the four-year sky wheel in golden gate park. the wheel has been a positive attraction to the community and a vital tool that will aid in the recovery of the broader businesses just like mine. tourism event production industries have been hit the hardest and we need this wheel in golden gate park. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. hi everybody. my name is chica menzi. i'm a program specialist and i'm also a hunters point resident and i am in full support of the four year extension of the farris wheel. i think in terms of protecting wildlife they should forget we have an operation closing time where the lights go off when operation stops. other than that, i think that this would be a great way to bring more families and youth on this side of town to go and explore other parts of the city. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. this is robert tesler. active san francisco park user. practically raised all my children in the parks. just a few brief comments today in support of the four-year extension. first, the observation wheel is a positive attraction for the community and the city. attractions like this provide a real boost to the neighborhood and neighborhood businesses. especially in light of the pandemic and the economic recovery, attractions like this provide a real and needed boost. the four-year extension has to my understanding and i think a few people have pointed that out have been approved by the historic reservation community and the rec and park committee. i have to ask the question, how many government entities this will take to screw in this particular light bulb. i believe we've reached our limit. i know that the board can walk and chew gum at the same time, i can't help but comment that certain members seem to be spending an inorder nant and disproportionate time on this matter. it's already been reviewed. so i think we should focus on real matters such as homelessness and issues that have been cast within overseeing the parks. thank you very much. >> thank you. can we have the next caller. >> good i guess we're in the afternoon. we support the resolution. our precious park land is often viewed as empty open space just waiting if for buildings or other attractions to be added to it. we are very concerned that rec and park never asked for approval to place this structure in golden gate park. rec and park and their vendors are fighting so desperately against this one structure that we have to wonder what other development projects is the rec and park department planning for golden gate park. we suggest that the supervisor add this to her list of questions. the special interest groups will always want one more feature built in our premier landscape park. we will lose our park land to those structures turning golden gate park into a series of attractions for the few lone trees here and there, a sad reminder to future children that this was once a landscape park. get this intrusive anti-nature structure out of golden gate park forever. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi, my name is cathy shoop and i own annie's hot dogs and we are a food vendor in golden gate park and the sky wheel has helped us a lot to make it through the pandemic especially monday through friday. the park is always pretty busy saturday and sunday if the weather's decent, but monday through friday, we really struggle to open and to make ends meet and most of the reason we open is to keep people employed since i have ten full-time employees that have worked for me for a long time. i think it's very important that we keep the wheel there for four years for the economic recovery. and, as far as the environmental concerns, i understand those, but this part of golden gate park is not really the premier natural area. you know, we have a hot dog park at spreckles lake and that's a much more peaceful place. this area already has two museums and the conservatory of flowers so i don't really see that concern. i personally would appreciate the four year extension. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> yes. good afternoon. this is linda schafer speaking in strong support of the resolution. golden gate park has been described as being many things to many people. that may be true, but sadly it cannot be all things to all people. in particular, it cannot be both an amusement park and an urban refuge where individuals and families enjoy recreation in a setting that is supportive of nature. there are amusement parks elsewhere for those who want to ride a farris wheel. we have only one golden gate park. thank you, commissioners, for thinking of nature, bio diversity, climate action and the long run. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is stephanie wiseman. i'm from sf nature and i support fun and i also support the one-year compromise with the lights out sunset and i have two points. first that the wheel's light show functions as a single 150' tall strobe light. this is not the bay bridge lights. much smaller lights have been documented to negatively impact nature including owls and humans. they're used for pest control actually. also, i would like to note there are 26 robotically strobe lights controlled. on 2-17 to the hpc that the concourse was always designed to function like a downtown park. this is not true. in 1894, the fair had a 266' tall observation structure like the eiffel tower with 3,000 lights in the middle of the concourse. the public sent them a team to keep the music concourse mcclaern in 1896 had the electric tower dynamited. william hall stated the value of the park consists of it being a park and not a catch all for almost anything misguided people may wish up to it. i appreciate your time and now my comments are complete. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is susan from the fine arts museum of san francisco which includes the museum that looks right over the wheel. we strongly support the four-year extension of the observation wheel. we see the music concourse as a major destination and also as an economic recovery driver and the wheel really adds an exciting and joyful experience to the park. we've been voicing our support both the park and rec and the historic preservation commission and also want to restate it here that we're fully in support of the four-year extension and, of course, we support financial transparency so the disclosure of any financial details that are needed per the comments earlier that we are in support. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> greetings, supervisors. thank you, chair, vice chair, and supervisor mandelman. i'm a district 8 voter. i want to thank you for the public forum to express my frustration and again having to call in for public comment on this issue. as i was framing out my thoughts on it i realize i couldn't say it better than commissioner mazola said last week. i and all of the other commissioners did hours of reading and debating and listening to public comment and made our decisions based on that due diligence. as the board of supervisors disregards all of that and overrides our decision, all of the work and thought that went into it was a waste of time. what good is to have any commission if the board decides they don't like the outcome, they will just override us. thank you for listening. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, my name is rob can. i run a youth sports nonprofit in the lower at 2,000 lower income youth in the city. both as someone who's responsible and delivers prooez programs to youth in the city as well as the parents myself, i'm calling to support the four-year extension of the sky star wheel in golden gate park and oppose the one year extension being here today. i love the wheel and what it gives to my family and the community as a reason to go to golden gate park and we believe that the park should be for everyone in having an attraction like this is very important for me and people like me more than ever. i'm impressed also that youth tickets and senior tickets are affordable and also that many of the youth that we serve will be able to go and ride the wheel for free and experience the beautiful views of the city. so i support this -- the wheel staying for four years. thanks so much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hey there. my name is ryan smith. i'm the production manager for bluegrass held in golden gate park. i am in full support of of the extension of the observation wheel made by both the historic preservation commission and the rec and park commission. obviously local businesses and events have been impacted immensely the last year and any positive attraction that brings families back to the park seem to be desperately needed at this time. also, it seems that if the board inserts itself on this matter and sets a precedent that every structure in golden gate park is subject to 2/3 approval, hardly strictly outside lands, beta breakers will face additional time consuming and unnecessary hurdles. these events not only bring joy to our community but are part of the social and cultural traffic of the city. my comments are complete. thanks for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi, my name is martha aaronsol. i'm a resident of district 5. i'm a proud volunteer. i also have the cochair of the tennis coalition and the president of the inner sunset park neighbors. the group is for all people who work, play, and live in the inner sunset. i'm strongly in favor of the four-year expansion i've been down there and people are waiting in line to go on the wheel coming from out of the city and i'm very excited as well as people from the city and the parks works so hard to support the parks throughout the city and raise money and improve playgrounds throughout the bay. so please support the four year extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi, good afternoon . can everyone hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> awesome. my name is lila pitman i'm the director of dance community. i would like to say i'm in full support of the sky star wheel and not only am i in full support of the wheel, but i'm in full support of the four-year extension. i feel that san francisco really, really needs this not only to bring families closer together especially after a time such as this pandemic that we all have been facing, but it will also bring revenue into the city. i understand some of you guys have issues with the contracts that have been, you know, under way dealing with sf parks alliance. we have, our organization has collaborated with sf parks alliance in the past and what i can say is they have been definitely providing -- activating our community parks here in [inaudible] as well as providing programs and opportunities to underserved communities. and so even though you guys may not be aware of where that money is going, i heavily believe that that funding would definitely support programs that are in underserved communities. i am in support of the extension of the sky star wheel. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi, my name is genie oralana. we enthusiastically support a four-year extension of the sky star wheel. in the brief time the wheel was open, we saw an increase in park visitors overall not to mention a bump in business. the wheel makes people happen and more importantly the vendor plans to distribute 16,000 tickets to our most underserved residents. bringing folks to the park who may otherwise never visit. that seems very promising to us especially following such a terrible year. we also have a plan to remedy concerns. parkwide and all of us in the park welcome this temporary but joyful attraction to you're little active music concourse area of the park. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. my name is jennifer freeland. i'm a resident of san francisco and a mother to two elementary-aged children. i am in full support of the full four-year extension of the sky wheel. i think it's an attraction for our city that will bring joy to many of our families and it's also an important economic driver to our city. i think there's more than one way to enjoy the park and i also question the decision to bring up this issue again when it seems like it was really [inaudible] by the historic preservation and the parks and rec. thank you for your time and that's all the comments i have. >> clerk: thank you. next caller, please >> hello. i live in golden gate park with my family. i'm call engine support of the four-year extension and oppose the proposed one-year extension. the wheel is a positive attraction for the community and families like mine and others a little levity during what's considered a difficult time during the pandemic. i also understand in the aid and recovery of the vendors of the tourism. i have grown to really embrace the wheel in the park and look forward to having it around for a couple more years and it was also approved by the historic preservation commission and the rec and parks commission. i don't know why it's being discussed right now. you know, thank you very much and have a good day. >> clerk: thank you. just a quick announcement. if you haven't already done so, please press star 3 to be added to the queue to speak. for those already on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. at this time, we have approximately 72 people listening with 31 people in line to speak. and, in addition, please note that public comment for this item is for today and there will be no additional public comment at the board of supervisors meeting. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. my name is julie dunn and i am a resident of district 7 as well as a mother raising six generation san franciscans and a small business owner of an event planning business that has been greatly impacted this year. i am calling in support of the extension. this wheel is a positive, wonderful attraction for our community. it's also a vital tool that will aid in the recovery of small businesses like mine, tourism, and event production industries. please consider the need the san francisco residents and workers in this regard. again, i'm in full support of the extension of the wheel. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can i have the next caller please. >> hi, can you hear me. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> hi my name is nancy norris from the ymca of san francisco. i oversee the preschool program. calling for extension of the sky wheel in golden gate park. we believe that the wheel's a positive attraction for the community and it will also help san francisco's economic recovery. the affordability allows many of the families from our program to enjoy golden gate park and to enjoy the beauty of the park and surrounding attractions. we are in full support to the existing four-year extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello. >> clerk: hi. we can hear you. please proceed >> okay. great. i live on -- i'm a resident of the bayview and i actually just found out about this farris wheel last night. i'm not upset but i am disappointed that i did not know about it and that i'm just now finding out that it's trying to be taken down or that my area was limited to the knowledge of this farris wheel. i would like to say i'm in support of the four-year. i would like for me and other people my age to be able to have access to something like this for longer than one year and, also, i don't think it should just be for one year because we are still in a global pandemic and i believe that i'm still taking safety precautions when it comes to being around other people so i would want to as we start to open up more, i would like to eventually be able to still have access to it and not a year later if we happen to still be in the same stage that we are as a city. i wouldn't be able to have that opportunity. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> clerk: do we have a caller on the line? there does not appear to be a response at this time. can we move on to the next caller? >> good afternoon. can you guys hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can hear you. please proceed. >> my apologies. my name is daniel greg. i'm representing approximately 4,000 members in the city of san francisco. i'm call engine today as a representative to fully support the four-year extension in opposition of the limited one-year extension. golden gate park is a beautiful destination point for san francisco families throughout the bay area. the objection observation wheel adds to the attraction of the park. the carpenter ys union has a great relationship. the attractions like the observation wheels and events such as outside lands and bluegrass work and consistently provide living wage jobs. we are facing uncertain economic realities as we come out of the global pandemic. we still do not know if the vast marjt of the community will feel comfortable enough to bring their families to the park and enjoy this attraction. limiting the wheel to one year is a step in the wrong direction. we ask if the san francisco rec and park decision as well as the historic preservation's unanimous decision to approve our four-year extension of the wheel in the park. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> i want to go ahead -- hello. hi. it's collin schmidt with the bay area. working with thousands of students and their families here in san francisco and we are in support of the four-year extension of the farris wheel. we are for anything that brings more happiness and more joy to san francisco and to the families that live here. we believe that the due diligence has been done on this issue and that anything that is family friendly, revenue positive that contributes to other additional recreational programs is a good thing for not just a year, but for four years and we are benefits not for the attraction itself and for the passes that have been provided for the families that we're working with and that it succeeds in getting people to the park that wouldn't otherwise come. it's an incentive and an attraction that brings people into the park and we are in support of it and the four-year extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello, can you hear me. >> clerk: we're getting a local buzz from your line. if you have any other devices on, it would be appreciated if you can turn them off. but we can hear you at this time. >> i'm calling to support this [inaudible] . >> clerk: we can no longer hear you. we did hear you support the matter. however, the loud buzz is not allowing you to hear you at this time. >> clerk: if you have issue, you can call back and we can take your comment at the later time. next caller, please. >> good afternoon. i'm a 45 year resident of san francisco. golden gate park is a crown jewel of san francisco. why on earth would it need a farris wheel to attract visitors. please top the commercialization of the park. honor the original intent of the agreement. move the wheel to pier 39 where it can all the benefits such as recovery, tourism, business, [inaudible] to underserved residents. please approve this one year reasonable resolution. i'm in support of supervisor chan's concern of funneling money through this project that's under scrutiny and also regarding comments about the commission having already approved this meeting, we need to rethink how these commissions are created. maybe they have a slanted kind of view of what the forward motion should be in the city. i urge you to support the one year extension and the removal of the year. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. my name is chev asani. i'm calling in behalf of the san francisco restaurant we represent. we need to do all we can to safely bring tourism back to all parts of our city and the sky star wheel is a great opportunity to do so. attractions like this will only help the critical recovery period for our industry and others over the coming years while providing a fun, unique experience for our local residents especially for youth and families taking into consideration our comments. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is kyle meyers. i'm calling today to voice my full support for the sky wheel in golden gate park. as a daily park user, i've always supported the addition of the wheel to the concourse. it is a fitting accompaniment to the variety of activities in that area. with the full extension it will continue to serve as a vital tool. additionally, as a small business owner and local event producer who utilizes golden gate park for numerous events throughout the year, i'm extremely concerned about the precedent this would set would be subject to a 2/3 board approval. february of 2020 and it is still certain it would be up and running again. we could do without additional time, costly hurdles and approval processes, especially at a time when we're trying to bring live events back to the community. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is nate ford. life long san francisco resident. i wanted to say i'm fully in support of the four-year extension for the wheel. i think this, you know, it's a lot of it is where i work it hasn't been able to experience this and, you know, i think, you know getting kids from, you know, parks backgrounds to come and extend something as beautiful as that wheel and the park would only just brighten up, you know their day because it's been kind of bleak as you all know. i'm in full support of the wheel and hope you guys approve it. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> my name is chris keen. i and my wife live in sunset. we've been here aboutfifteen years. we've raised three kids in the city. i'm also from the midwest so i get a bunch of visitors from out of town. from the aesthetic standpoint, the farris wheel is very tasteful. it's not an amusement park like people have alluded to. it's a current attraction for kids who live here. not everybody who lives here or visits the park wants to look at roses or paintings. the farris wheel or something like it in my opinion has been missing from golden gate park and when it is taken down in four years, it's going to be missed then. i would also like to add that taking away from childrens' fun is exactly the kind of thing that lands san francisco in the national news for all the wrong reasons especially when we can't get kids back into school and when we can't get teachers affordable housing. i would suggest humbly that the grown-ups in charge of the supervisors focus on those issues full time as opposed to taking away the farris wheel. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> thank you so much. my name is john goldsmith. i'm a california native, 30 year san francisco resident. i am grateful to supervisor peskin for bringing this item to the rules committee. i have concerns about the way that deal came through about the observation wheel. it is bad for the environment. we know that. i appreciate the previous item on the agenda was about the families and youth committee. i support that as well because the youth will need the environment in the future and this sort of deal, observation wheel is bad for the environment and it's inches towards privatization and it's impacting our bio diversity resolution passed by city hall in 2018. as a reminder, the official bird of san francisco is the california quail and they used to live in golden gate park, but they are now extinct because of human activity such as this. i'm all for fun, it's true, but i'd like to see the observation wheel in other places such as the exis alsoier district where the retail environment is horrible. or fraps clean up the super fun site at bayviewpoint. that would be a great attraction for the low income folks that live in that area. this is an out-of-state contract with missouri -- >> clerk: your time is up. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, supervisors. my name's levi johnson. i'm an sciu member and 've been living in the richland district since 2006. i have reviewed all the pros and cons on this issue and i'm calling today to support the four year extension already passed by two other commissions and oppose the one-year extension discussed today. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. >> hi. good afternoon. this is lavanda williams. i'm calling from bayview in san francisco. a resident for over 35 years. been in the city for 50 years. i am also chief stuart. i am calling to support the four year extension. i propose the proposal extension for the one year that was being heard today. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is gregory deeser. i'm a member of sciu1021. i am calling in support of the existing four-year extension of the sky star observation wheel in golden gate park. it's a positive attraction for the city and an important part of restoring san francisco's tourism, hospitality, and recreation industries which have been hit hardest by the pandemic. an enormous amount of time is being spent on the wheel while far more pressing issues have been on hand. the re-opening of our schools, homelessness and significant increases in crime. as was already stated, the one year proposal today would set a precedent potentially burdening some of golden gate park's most infamous venues. these are venues which create jobs in industries like food, transportation, cleaning, and public safety to name a few. the observation wheel has gun improving its commitment to the city by offering five00 prerides. to the children of san francisco. it is our hope that the board may drop this matter and uphold the four year extension made by the historic commission and the parks commission. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is teresa folilo ramirez. representing approximately 5,000 workers and their families in marin and san mateo families. while the city is continue plating layoffs and service cut we cannot cancel anything contributing to. now drawing people from across the bay area and perhaps even the world to golden gate park. many will make a day of it lunching and visiting, local businesses spending money to cut the exists four-year extension to one year is cutting and limiting our economic recovery when the city government should be doing everything in their power to guarantee our successful recovery. please don't cut our limit, our potential for successful recovery. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> clerk: i assume that we will skip that caller at this time and move on to the next caller. caller, we had a loud tone and we could not hear you. if you'd like to try to call back and get back in line to speak, you can do it. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. we can hear you. >> i'm calling to support the existing four-year extension of the sky star wheel is golden gate park being heard today. i'm excited to hear that community learning helps students and public housing residents have the opportunity to experience this beautiful wheel and see the view of the city for free. providing this access and opportunity for our underserved youth that have been isolated for the distance -- with distanced learning for the last year is so crucial and needed and we are in full support of this resolution. thank you for giving me the time to speak on this resolution. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi, my name is [inaudible] gonzalez. [inaudible] -- this one is really testing me and chair peskin, and the committee, we're at a critical point. i had the honor to serve along rodney [inaudible] and the chamber. city economic recovery task force and i think we would all agree we're at a critical point in our economic recovery. questions remain about whom will benefit when we look back on this period. god help us if this farris wheel is the biggest fish we're willing to fry. the parks and rec operation with went through two commissions. i believe all eyes are on that. i don't have a short memory. just in june or july of last year, several of you voted against a public advocate. if our concern was around corruption and these issues, then we should of sided with ronen, mar, haney at that time. i think it's unfire and disrespectful of all the volunteers at that alliance to try to legit mately corrupt the executive management of the city you're supposed to be keeping an eye on and now we find ourselves in the distractive battle. we don't think you should ignore environmental concerns or input for the neighborhood. but i think by in large that supports the structure on a long term and for the economic recovery. >> clerk: your time has ended. thank you. next caller, please. >> hello. can you hear me. >> clerk: yes. we can hear you. please proceed. >> hi, my name's [inaudible] . i would like to keeping the farris wheel and [inaudible] -- extremely financially beneficial to small businesses in the area. plus, i think as a resident of district 10 that if we were not super aware of it and i think the city should explore options and use this as a way to get young people back [inaudible] -- and especially recovering from covid. thank you, i'm done. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is drew becker, the ceo of the san francisco parks alliance and i serve as ceo because parks and public spaces are my great passion. the golden gate park 150 was intended to begin openingable city event to celebrate the park. this including shuttles running from libraries to equity zones to bring children and families to golden gate park. additionally, the sky star wheel has offered 500 free rides a month. attractions should be supported by san francisco. through many initiatives, the park alliance invested over 100. some of these projects would not sxis without the parks alliance, washington square playground. panhandle playground, eagle plaza, conservatory of flowers and many more. a vital tool that will aid in the recovery and event production industries. we ask you to please consider the need of san francisco residents and workers in this regard. members and the board of supervisors seem to be spending an unprecedented amount of time on this wheel. when we should be focused on covid-19 vaccines, and fever pitch of small businesses struggling and increased crime. thank you for your time and i appreciate -- i appreciate working with every single one of you and all of your districts on making san francisco the greatest city in the country. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> can you hear me now? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> good afternoon. david pillpel. so i commented last week before the environmental review officer before the appeal file of cathy howard no significant modification determination of the environmental review issue. i've not heard a decision on that yet. golden gate park is a public park, not an amusement park. i'm not crazy about the wheel at all. as a compromise, i support the resolution before you to limit the extension to one year and not four. one might ask what john mcclearen the founding superintendent of the park would say about this matter. i wonder given the public comment before me whether the recreation parks department organized park concessionaries, community activists and parks alliance supporters here. i don't always agree with the board of supervisors, but i absolutely recognize that they are elected to represent the people. other city boards and commissions perform specific functions and are appointed to do so. anyone who wants to restructure the powers and duties of our city government can repair and try to pass a charter amendment. otherwise, it's entirely up to the board toll decide this one and i weigh in support of the compromise resolution before you today. thanks very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we get the next caller, please. >> hi, may i proceed? >> clerk: yes. please proceed. >> my name is noah lung. i am calling in support for the four-year extension. i'm a long-term resident of the richland district. i've been working as a essential worker and i believe it's projects like these that are essential to restart the economy and generate revenue and, without projects like these, i wouldn't be able to work. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. are you done with your speech? if you have any -- >> reporter: i just wanted to repeat that i fully support the four-year extension of the sky star wheel. okay. thanks. >> clerk: okay. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. i am a district 10 resident, hispanic, mom, nonprofit professional and wife and calling to share my full support of the existing resolution that has gone before the rec and park and historic reservation commissions. playground fair building and the community groups and parks that they support. my family is mixed middle class. i cannot think of a nonprofit that has made a better impact, a bigger impact a real and tangible impact on the livability of this city. with that in mind, i'm deeply disturbed of the accusations by supervisor chan. if their proof is there's a scandal, then they have some faulty logic. multiple bad actors. parks alliance has not been charged or incriminated despite the words i've heard in the recent weeks. government leaders would be extra careful when they accuse. i learned that supervisor chan literally called the request for this investigation her coming out and aaron peskin said it was a fact they are crooked. this feels like politics at the reputation of the ordinance that every city benefits from if. i hope that everyone in government will get back to focusing on the real problems of the city but the ongoing, inefficient and expensive home strategy -- >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is john korso. i also am calling in to support the existing four-year extension of the sky star wheel in the park and subsequently opposing the proposed one-year extension being heard today. we ask the board drop this matter and allow the decision to approve the four-year extension and the rec and park commission to be upheld. as a matter of fact, we feel the members of the board are spending way too much time and energy on this talking about a farris wheel. we've got covid problems and we've got vaccination roll-out problems. cools are closed. we've got tents all over the city and we're worried about a farris wheel. that's where we stand here at local 38. i stand for myself and others who couldn't make it on the call today. everybody have a great day. >> clerk: thank you. i'd just like to make a quick announcement while i have a chance. members of the public who wish to make a public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001. meeting i.d. is 1875577823, press pound and then pound again. please continue to wait until you have been unmuted. we have approximately 16 members of the public waiting to speak at this time and i also want to remind members of the public that public comment on this item will be provided for today and will not be provided at the board of supervisors meeting. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> hello, you hear me? >> clerk: yes. we do. please proceed. >> this is ramon with local 261. representing over 5,000 members. i encourage to the supervisors and the public to vote on four more years of this farris wheel. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. caller, you have been unmuted. you can proceed if you can hear us. caller, you can proceed with your public comment at this time. it does not appear that he can hear us at this time. can we skip him for now and move on to the next caller. >> hi, this is pam hinthill. it's very strange that a farris wheel has somehow become the symbol of economic recovery. rec and park has called in all supporters from various organizations. why can't rec and park accept a one year compromise that accommodates nature. it is indeed difficult to have to argue with rec and park to protect nature. golden gate park is not just real estate. will bumper cars be next as suggested by another caller. no one seems to notice that the dollars for the wheel, 95% go to the sky star corporation investors who are based in missouri. they will make millions. it does not help san francisco. i support having kids and adults out in nature, it helps to have nature nearby and accessible to all as golden gate park is please support the one year compromise. i would prefer that the wheel leave now as scheduled, but understand that some san franciscans still want a chance to ride and that there are some free tickets for one year and so this seems like a good solution for all. >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. i've lived in san francisco for about 15 years and currently in the inner sunset. i'm calling in full support of the four-year extension of the wheel that's already been passed by the commission. i think the wheel is awesome. it really looks great. perfectly set between the two parks. great location for it. my daughter loves it. she loves seeing it every day. we haven't ridden it yet but we're excited to now that it's open again. i also represent [inaudible] -- advocate for more housing and other development in the city. we supported extension of the wheel originally. i think it's going to be really important for our small business community. they have really struggled through this. it's going to take them time to get back on their feet. as soon as businesses open. so, you know, we think we need the full four year extension to help our community. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. >> as a private resident of the community and i'm calling in support of the actual extension of the four years for the farris wheel. and that's about it. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller. caller, you may proceed with your public comment >> hello, yes. good morning. i didn't know my line had been unmuted until now. i'm a long-term resident of san francisco and the inner sunset and every time i see this wheel, my heart sinks. there's nothing environmental about it. it's sad this can be considered [inaudible] -- your children to nature. groups such as the friends in the tea garden parentally support this along with other people that make money for this park. parks alliance does not represent the interest of san franciscans and only wealthy people and there has never been -- there was never one community meeting about this farris wheel before it was instituted. there was not one community meeting about 150 anniversary of golden gate park which we didn't even know this celebration was happening until it was canceled. i had to read about this in the paper. it's just wrong the way this is being done and shame on these members and the community being bribed by these tickets. we have to look at this every day and night and it's just part of the plan to destroy the interest of golden gate park at 9th and lincoln and it looks like a corporate entrance. the guard has been privateized. we're losing our nature bit by bit and don't represent anybody that are aappointed by special interest and contain all these people and, again, do not listen to us. all this is completely wrong. we need a complete transformation of the system and we need [inaudible] -- >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> okay. thank you, supervisors. good afternoon. my name is liola gans and i'm with the san francisco public housing tenant association phta. i am in full support of the four-year extension of the sky star wheel and i'm opposed to the one-year. thank you. >> clerk: can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is liz farrell and i'm the board chair for the san francisco parks alliance. i am a volunteer, i'm also a mom and avid user of golden gate park. it's hard to believe that we're still talking about this. the wheel is part of golden gate park 150th celebration that was intended to be an equitable open city event to celebrate the parks. we have several initiative its dedicated to this that we still hope will happen including shuttles running from libraries and equity zones to bring children and families to golden gate park. additionally, sky star wheel is committed to families by offering free tickets per month. it's hard to believe that we are talking about the wheel when an amount of resources have been used on this. while the city faces much more challenging and pressing issues. as far as your questions about the parks alliance, i tell my own children, if you have an issue with someone, confront them in a respective way. and reach out to the parks alliance with your questions before pointing fingers unfairly at a nonprofit. whose sole mission is to transform our parks spaces. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is nancy. and, i'm the director of san francisco nature education as well as a field onothologist in golden great park where i study a colony of great blue herons that have nested there for 35 years. i want to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this to the committee. for all the people objecting to the time on this, i'd say this is democracy and the original contract for the wheel was only for one year. so this is a reasonable compromise to make the farris wheel owners whole with a one-year extension. it's also settled that the bright lights, the artificial lights affect negatively bird migrations. and, we all know this. this is settled science. so i want to applaud the board of supervisors for this meeting and urge them just to go one-year extension like was originally planned and keep the park safe for wildlife and the people that enjoy it. also, when we talked about helping the local businesses that serve food, why is the sky wheel serving food? thank you very much and please extend this contract for one year. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller please. >> greetings, supervisors. my name is maisha bell. i work for the ymca of san francisco. i am also a resident of district 5. i am commenting support of the four-year extension of the farris wheel. i feel like it provides an opportunity of hope and engagement for our youth. i don't think we should discount the impact it could have on their long-term development. we also know that in normal times, young people are spending less time engaged in nature and the pandemic has really increased that reality. while the farris wheel itself is not going to fix that issue, it can be a catalyst to getting these young people into nature and engagement and really intentionally provide support and opportunities that can expand their knowledge and access in this area. so i sincerely ask you to really consider what this would mean on the future leaders of the city of san francisco and take advantage of our opportunity to really uplift them. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is greg miller. i support the one-year that's being continue plated. i think it's good compromise for lovers of golden gate park and for those who would like to experience the fun of the wheel. five years is ridiculous to think of it as a temporary installation. in my opinion, it's likely to lead the permanent situation on the wheel and the music concourse the way things work. the rec and park department used to be the protector of our parks. it's long ceased to be that and is now an enterprise that seeks to monetize our public lands and generate cash flow for whatever purposes. the board needs to step up to the plate here and exercise the rights of the charter not because of this specific issue, but certainly they need to ask why did rpd basically evade any type of board over review of this. and, what's so important about generating a cash flow for an out-of-town private vendor here which stands to make millions of dollars if this runs for five years. and, finally, why was that money parked in the accounts of a nonprofit which has no basically overview from the board or from the rest of the city. the rec and park commission has ceased long go being an effective oversight viewer of the rec and park department and is now subject to total regulatory capture. please take a look at this department and what it's doing -- >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> okay. i'm sure you're tired of hearing that today. so i'm a resident of san francisco and i just want to ask supervisor chan why she's spending so much time on this issue and not addressing the horrible assault that happened to a senior in the safeway parking lot? as residents of san francisco, we shouldn't be afraid to leave our homes. i'm asking that we focus on the important issues. that's all. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is karen gonzalez. i'm the co-owner of the cochinica food truck in the golden gate park and i'm supporting the four-year extension. when sky star wheel was closed, we did see a drop in visitors and business. customers would ask us daily when it would be re-opening as they were excited for a chance to ride the wheel. in a short period of time it has opened back up, we have seen an immediate increase in business and we don't know what will happen in 2021, i do belief that the sky wheel extension will contribute to bringing more visitors as additional. it will help neighbors businesses, their employees, the community, and the economy. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. i'd just like to make another announcement or reminder, if you have not already done so. please press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. we have approximately thirty-four listeners and eight people in line to speak at this time. can we have the next caller, please. >> good evening, supervisors. i hate to say this again, but can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> thank you. my name is joann desman. our union represents over 2,000 workers who have been seriously impacted by covid-19 for the past year. i am hear to speak in opposition to pending legislation requiring a 2/3 vote on any temporary structures in golden gate park. this measure would be detrimental to the many events produced in our wonderful park. this would be a costly and time consuming burden to the production teams responsible for a great many events including hardly strictly bluegrass, opera in the park, and outside lands which happens to be one of the biggest events for our union members. in the past year our union has seen 95% unemployment. any additional hurdles will be devastating to our employment. both of which did significant work before they rendered their decision. thank you for your consideration. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. caller, you have been unmuted. you can proceed with your comment. >> hi, i am an inner richman resident. i support the four-year extension. while i am very cognizant of the effect of the light on bird migration, i think we should also take a look at other lights like the top of the sales force tower that haven't passed [inaudible] and i'd love to have the board focus on the two deaths we are experiencing each day from drug overdose. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> i'm calling to support the existing four-year extension of the sky tower wheel in golden gate park and opposing the one-year extension being heard today. this is rudy from united players. i'm a native of san francisco, born and raised. still live here and i know it's beneficial for the youth which we serve throughout the whole city and so thank you for letting me comment. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> good afternoon. my name is michelle canter and i'm a long time san francisco resident of bayview for 57 years. i have raised children and grandchildren and other children in the city and i can remember when i used to go to play land back in the '60s and ride the [inaudible] and go to 38 play land to get on the farris wheel and go to the recreation that was at playland. this, i am -- i am very interested and i agree with the four-year term to extend the farris wheel. i think it is a very profitable and educational project for other children who don't know about farris wheels. there's a great, a lot of things to learn about the farris wheel and how it operates. golden gate park is a beautiful park and i think this is a very nice attraction to the park celebrating the continuance of the celebration of golden gate park and i pray and hope that we continue helping each other and loving each other in god's way. thank you. >> thank you, can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. my name is robert moon. i'm a 20 year district 1 resident and registered voter and i voted for supervisor chan and thank you very much for giving me a moment to share my opinion. i support the four-year extension of the sky star wheel. it's economically and community beneficial. we shouldn't need to revisit what's already been approved. i think it's a waste of time and it's actually encouraging visiting even further. so thank you very much. that's the end of my comment. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> my name is anthony i'm from 621 union, local labor union. i just want to say i support that farris wheel. i think some people forget when they were kids how it felt to ride a farris wheel. once you grow up, you kind of forget the things that you really -- that made you really happy to see and to be able to ride. that farris wheel means a lot to a lot of kids and not only that, we should have a whole park out here for these kids so they can't be getting shot at, robbing, stealing, wondering why these kids doing what they're doing,. there's no support. i remember back in the day. we need to leave the farris wheel alone and revisit some of the other things that's going on in the city about where money is going. anyway. that's my little spiel for the day. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon. and thank you for this opportunity to comment. i'm a san francisco native and also a 261 member. as a native, i don't want to lose anymore of what i consider general local attractions like playland. once these are lost, they're gone and you can't take your kids to them like my father to me and i took my son. it's also a job creator and it's a revenue creator. i support a four-year license would be more appropriate and i do also believe the board of supervisors has more pressing issues to attend to such as pandemics and homelessness. this attraction is very popular among locals and i thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. my name is catrina fering and i'm calling to lend my voice to the overwhelming support you've heard today and to oppose this one-year proposal. there have been many points already raised today that i'd just like to echo. calling this in golden gate park an exaggeration. you can enjoy views of golden gate park and the city. and it's a great way to dra >> clerk: your time has elapsed. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is sofie and i'm a mother in district 8 and i use the park every single day with my daughter and i wanted to chime in and say what many others have said to thank parks alliance for their work to rebuild parks and playgrounds for families like mine that are relying on them in every neighborhood and truly the last year has underscored how essential these parks are. and, with regards to the farris wheel, i can't tell you how many parents talking about how much they appreciate this. it's been a rare source of whimsy and fun during a difficult time and i urge you to extend it for another four years. thank you so much for your time. >> clerk: thank you. just to let you know, the next caller is the last caller we have on the line. if you have not already done so, please dial star 3 to be added to the queue. thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> thank you. my name is kirt grimes and i'm the program manager with the aprisf. i would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague jacquelyn flynn. supervisors, most importantly i'm addressing you as a san francisco native and a resident of district ten . i'm in favor of the four-year extension. i believe this extension will allow all of us to enjoy the park and its attractions, but most importantly, it will aid in our economic recovery and our recovery from this terrible pandemic. once again, i urge you to extend the stay for the sky wheel for four more years. i believe this extension will help all of us out in the long run in terms of our pandemic recovery and our economic recovery. thank you. >> clerk: all right. we had four additional people line up to speak. can we have the next caller, please. >> hi. this is ori deman. i'm a resident of district 8. i am in favor of the four-year extension. but i'm really appalled by the comments made by supervisor peskin and supervisor chan. i'm a board member of park alliance and joined the park alliance so i can give voice to people who normally don't get heard. i joined the board because i think this is a part of my public service to not only join the board but continue the park alliance. so without any evidence, them trying to accuse a nonprofit that has an open policy that you can go and see online there is a 990 forum for them saying they are corrupt. i hope they will talk to us. they can come and see how we work and they will know that the benefit we provide to the city. yes, it's a controversial project, i understand that and i can hear peoples' voices, but just think about the number of kids who will benefit from it. it's a wonderful opportunity for kids to see this magnificent park from the top. i hope you support this project. thank you. >> thank you, can i have the next caller, please. >> can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you. please proceed. >> my name is pinky kushner. i am in line with the four-year extension. those and its country atmosphere as well as people who seek the natural refuge the park is well-known for. the park has lots of entertainment in its natural state. we don't need an amusement park to have fun at golden gate park. but one of the commentors had mentioned playland. maybe we should. maybe the city should have a playland in the city just not in golden gate park. it would be helpful if the supervisors would take up this discussion and think about where in the city a playland would be appropriate. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello. are you able to hear me? >> clerk: yes. we can hear you. please proceed. >> yes. i was called to support the 12-month extension but not to support the 48-month extension. 48 months is really saying that it's going to [inaudible] -- like a permanently, and it's way too bright and tall to be there permanently. i do support the 12-month extension. but i do not support the 48-month extension. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we have the next caller please. >> hi, my name is stephanie and i'm also calling to lend my voice and support to the existing four-year extension of the sky star wheel in golden gate park. for all the reasons that have been previously expressed, but most importantly because two commissions have already looked at this and there are other important pressing matters for this board to address. and, i also worry that if the board inserts itself on this matter and sets that precedent that others have talked about that every other temporary measure is subject to 2/3 board approval, thresholds, really great events like hardly strictly bluegrass, outside lands, that additional time consuming and unnecessary hurdle and i also just want to say to the gentleman who was very furious there were no community meetings about this. there were no community meetings about the flow streets either that are affecting everyone all across the city as well. so please respect the decision made by both the historic preservation commission and the rec and park commission and also for everyone who's trashing the rec and park commission, i've raised two boys in this city and they have done a phenomenal job of keeping youth sports active and youth engaged in sports which is also outside getting kids outside. so there's a lot to be outside in nature that doesn't involve just strolling through a park which my boys do and they also bike through it. they also play sports and that's also important and thank you so much for your time. >> clerk: thank you. i believe this will be our last caller. shall we get the next caller, please. >> yes. my name is lance grimes. i'm from district 3. i've been with san franciscans for urban nature. i support the current resolution before the rules committee for a one-year extension and i'm -- it seems like 100 callers came in today with a cheat sheet in front of them that had all the same points. the one that really grates on my nerves a little bit is that this is such a great family event as far as i can tell you, you wait one hour in line for a three-hour ride. actually, i just read there's a new circus in town that will be performing in north beach. why not hire a local company to provide entertainment for your children a one-hour circus show that cost $5 maybe and give them a lot more enjoyment and support a local business. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. that completes our caller queue. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed. and, before we discuss this amongst the committee members, let me just -- well just the last speaker agree that we heard a lot of very similar testimony on both sides, but i just want to address some of the contentions. the first and most you ubiquitous one. my cosponsor and colleague supervisor chan, the drafting of this motion which is a template motion because so many different things have come to the board of supervisors under 4.113 that all you have to do is take it off the internet and put a few words in many and take a few words out and i think i've got about 15 minutes into this deal other than listening to the invaluable public comment that we've received and the hundreds of e-mails that we have received and i have to say the vast preponderance of those e-mails are supportive of this resolution which me and my colleagues have received. i do also want to agree with one of the speakers mr. pillpell that he is right relative to a law which is that this is an elective body and this is within our right to consider as a matter of fact. charter section 4.113 that the voters put into place presumably because of excesses by the then rec and park commission years ago is very clear that this is a specific right that is -- that goes to the board of supervisors only in the case of golden gate parks and union square. the rest of the parks, there is exclusive jurisdiction by the rec and park commission. indeed, sponsored by then supervisors diane feinstein, quinnton cop, john mulonari. it really treats golden gate park differently exclusively under the rec and park commission. and then, i want to say something that is important which is a deal is a deal and deals change and certainly covid has changed many landscapes, but one thing is true which is that the wheel went up during covid knowing that covid was here and it was supposed to be a one year deal. this compromise and indeed it is a compromise acknowledges that the wheel only ran for 39 -- actually now more than thirty-nine days of the original one-year term that was going to go april to april. it actually adds time to it, but it's consistent with the original deal relative to the original money, relative to how it's still yet to be answered how the money flows for the 150th anniversary of the park, a party which has not happened. and, i am indeed concerned about mission inquiry. this was supposed to be a one year commission. obviously, that first year was obviated by one year covid. obviously, supervisor chan and i considered one year is fair. so with those words, i will turn it over to my colleagues and hear their thoughts if any of you want to jump in or put your name up, the floor is whichever one of you want to talk. vice chair mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: i have complicated. including the public advocate which i thought was an interesting comment by the director of the building trades and i continue to disagree that the election of another elected official in a city that seems to be heavy on elected officials is the solution in government. that was just one of many ideas that have been thrown around. as a couple of points that i want to say and i don't think they're directly related to the resolution. but i want to say them. the first is to acknowledge that rec and park is a bright spot in san francisco. that if you look at san franciscan satisfaction with various government services, rec park is near the top. they get beaten by libraries. in a city that doesn't feel terribly well, i don't think most san franciscans have that feeling about rec park. and the other thing i would say is that although private flanth pea is complicated. i didn't think we'd have to rely on it i do think that department has done an amazing job which i think for the most part has been si terrific thing. i want to thank the people some of whom called in today. so those two points have been made. i do think people who say that the board is somehow wrong to be looking at this or considering what should happen in golden gate park with a very large farris wheel that might last for four years or forever are not correct. i think that san franciscans have always cared a lot and fought fiercely about what should happen in golden gate park and what the right balance between passive recreation and more active recreation should be in different parts of the park. and, although i certainly understand the desire of or the feeling of the department that the board didn't need to be included in this. i do think this charter provision even if it doesn't legally require the board of supervisors to weigh in on the installation of a four-year or more farris wheel, i think the notion that the board of supervisors of the san francisco elected should weigh in the balance of the complicated competing interests on implicated by the large structures of a nontemporary basis in golden gate park. i think that the charter provisions suggest that we should be looking at this and we having to weigh those complicated and sometimes competing interests. so when people say well all these other commissions have looked at it, yes, that is true. i think that it is reasonable for supervisors to say that we have opinions ai cannot make up my mind today about whether this one year is the right length for this installation to be there whether it should be longer. i feel like there should be a win-win here where people stand down and engage with supervisors and try to work something out. i think we should put this to the vote to a democracy out there. most people have an opinion about the farris wheel think it should stay. i don't think because we think about the concerns of the most impacted immediate neighbors or about the environmental effects on the owls and birds and creatures that are in golden gate park. i am going to vote along to vote forward with the full board tomorrow because i think, you know, this should be discussed by the full board and it's absolutely within the rights of this board to weigh in on this and that's my view for now. >> chairman: thank you, vice chair mandelman. >> supervisor chan: thank you, chair bestkin. and i want to thank vice chair mandelman because about how the board should weigh in on this issue even the commission. i already said what i needed to say. after all the public comment that we have heard. i just want to have the opportunity to respond to some of that. again, i want to reiterate that i am in support of the one year extension kind of like what chair peskin has mentioned. a deal is a deal. it's in honor of that deal that has already approved for the golden gate park 150th anniversary. the reason why i think that we do end up stepping in is because that terms has changed. it is now asking for a four-year extension. make that a total of a five-year stay. i think that when terms and conditions change, it really changes everything else. and so, simply with this resolution is to ask for this to be -- to honor the original proposal and the true proposal and for those who argue that this is really this extended stay is for the sake of economic recovery. i, for one as a district one supervisor, i think that i will have -- i should really be concerned, greatly concerned if that the west side economic recovery, especially in golden gate park especially for small businesses dependent on a wheel, i think that i am not doing my job then. i will have a much bigger problem on my hasn't to make sure that we recover beyond. and last but not least to say that, you know, i work for recreation and parks department as a deputy direct to have. when i learned about former director of the department of public works account through san francisco parks alliance. i think for all the fellow city workers that have worked really hard for all these great open space recreation programming that everyone is just so pleased with and serving our constituents so well, it was a shame to learn that was the case. and for the director, executive director of parks alliance come on. again, not knowing its own organization history saying that parks alliance has been around for 20 years when in reality parks alliance was not formed until 2011. it was formerly known as parks and land trust and the neighborhood council. neighborhood parks council and to say that it has generated more than $100 million over time and to somehow say that it has transparency when there are anonymous donors throughout time. but most importantly, again, the whole situation with the former director of the department of public works. to figure this out or one thing because this is very simple. a corrupt government and it does a disservice to all my constituents if we allow a pay to play culture to fester even if in the face of all these things that we have done, good work that we all have done is again, like i said, disheartening when someone that violates that public trust. so it's the reason why i know that it's important to restore the trust and get to the bottom. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor chan. i also want to address one other condition. there were some speaker who is contended that acting pursuant to session 4.one hundred thirteen for what is a five year at a minimum. or proposed. and that notion is absurd. on its face for any number of reasons. as i said to greg perloff, the head of another planet last week, i would be more than happy, although this would be more time consuming to put some clarifications around the voter approved initiative propk as to what institutes temporary and should not come before the board pursuant to a 4.113 and what constitutes something that triggers 4.113 and so that is a project that i think this board and perhaps this rules committee should undertake and i just wanted to put that out there. with that. supervisor chan, would you like to make a motion. >> supervisor chan: yes. so moved. i'm making the motion to move this resolution to the board with recommendation. >> chairman: as the commending report. >> supervisor chan: yes. thank you. mr. clerk, on that motion, a roll call please. >> clerk: yes, on the motion to refer the matter with recommendation to the committee report. supervisor mandelman. [roll call] >> clerk: and that concludes. >> chairman: so that will appear tomorrow. that concludes our agenda and we are adjourned. >> erica wong: members will attend through audio and participate in the meeting as if they werephysically present. public comments will be available on each item on this agenda . either the public comment number ison the screen currently . the number is 415-655-0001. again, that number is 415-655-0001 . the meeting id is 187 681 1252. again, that number is 187 681 1252 . then press pound, pound. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussion but you will be muted and inlistening mode only . when the item of interest comes up, press star 3 tobe added to the speaker line . speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. submit public comment either to the transportation clerk at erica.wong@sfgov.org. it will be soonforwarded to the supervisors and be made part of the official file written comments may be sent via postal service to city hall . 244 san francisco california, 94102. finally, expected to appear on the agenda of march 23 unless otherwise stated. madam chair. >> chair melgar: thank you madam clerk, will you call the first item. >> erica wong: item 1 is an ordinance amending the plan include code to clarify amendments. approved an ordinance number 29682 which gives effect to the market area plan including provisions for transfer of development rights, publicly earned open space, electricity, pr for height, development impact fee, deposits and uses among others and to restore the locations inadvertently deleted and provisions regarding affordable housing to amend open space limits of mass production, lost coverage, cdr replacement and refining. members of the public who wish to provide public comments on item number one press 415-655-0001. meeting id is 187 681 1252. then press pound, pound. if you have not done so already dial star 3 to line up to speak. thesystem prompt will indicate you have raised your hand . madam chair. madam chair, you are muted. madam chair, are you there? i show your screenas muted . perhaps the vice chair is available?we are experiencing technicaldifficulties so if the vice chair is there to pick up the script . >> supervisor preston: i am available, taking afew seconds to see if our chair isavailable to unmute herself . if not i think we can proceed . >> erica wong: can we confirm supervisor peskinis your before we can proceed ? >> supervisor peskin: i am present. >> supervisor preston: unless the clerk suggests a recess to try to troubleshoot, given technical difficulties my inclination is to move forward. >> erica wong: we will get the chair reconnected. >> supervisor preston: lets how her staff presentation on item 1. >> and matt snyder of planning department staff joined by josh who is thehead of land-use and community development . you are going to provide you a presentation on the essential soma legislation. we were here before you i believe infebruary 8 . you continue that so we can provide you some briefings which we've done and through that we understand that supervisor peskin is interested in a couple nonsubstituted amendments and i'd be happy to describe those. i understand they have been forwarded to you just recently. essential soma is located roughly between sixand the second street with an irregular border on the north that reaches market street south . the central soma plan included the creation of a new area plan and implementation document that sets forth a broad range of community benefits worth about $2 billion and a strategy to pay for those including the creation of 2 no central soma impact fees in the creation of a central soma finance distric . the board of supervisors approved this original legislation in december 2018. since that legislation we followed up with legislation in 2019 that created the soma advisory committee . along with the plans for both east and western soma. the planning commission initiated these amendments and adopted them with recommendations to improve the board of supervisors in the fall. since the original approval staff has been moving aspects of the zoning amendments and their improvements. the cleanup legislation according to dataprovisions , we as planning staff would describe three central buckets area the first is to address inadvertent errors and incorrect suchas incorrect cross-references . that more accurately articulates the policy intent and we're here that they may be technically substantive because this policy intent was reflected in otherdocuments such as the implementation document . looking to essentially zoning codes consistent with that and then there are also two substantive changes which i will describe . i was going to show you a slide of the what we are calling clarify amendments since we don't havevisuals . i will describe them for you briefly. the first is an operating strategy . we required it in central soma, one of the things was to create complex operationstrategy . this is one of theamendments we're going to look at today as well . the second project object pr requirements of the central soma zoning including pr requirements for new construction of commercial projects of the house square feet or more and this clarifies this would also be for major additions defined by 20 percent edition with a net 50,000 square of the pr. the third one deals with lots covered limitations as just clarifies there's an 80 percent lot coverage requirement, this clarifies where that would not necessarily berequired . specifically on levels where you have residential units that have exposure to rights-of-way. the fourth is a series of amendments that deal with solar playing requirements, essentially south of market and throughout the city requirements for narrow streets and set down buildings, since also mucking alongwith some additional requirements . there was confusion as to which ones apply so these provisions essentially clarify what size of streets , the different requirements south of market. this is regarding the bmr fees, this establishes boundary from which the fees are collected in central soma canbe dispensed . in the larger soma geography, essentially that was established with the soma stabilization fee and the six as exceptions open space requirements. just with the central soma legislation there was a requirement that it you are unable to provide the full square footage of open space that you were required to pay a fee. the language was a little bit confusing and is just further clarifies that if it's the square footage looking for , you do need to pay the fee. as is regarding community facilities the area similar to the bmr and lose the this establishes the geography in which these collected can be spent. again consistent with one that was established or the soma stabilization fee and finally what we're goingcalling the clarifying amendments , the soma infrastructure fee. the zoning amendment indicated it was only to be spent on transit projects , the implementation documents and this funding plan indicated that it could be spent on both transit and open-space projects so that addresses that. the final sort of set of amendments are what we are calling the three substantive changes and the first is regarding provisions that allow a portion of the open space requirements off-site. this is also one of the amendments we're going to consider today, a planning code allows budget sponsors to require 50 percent of open-space off-site as long as it'swithin 100 feet of the project development . one of the open-space goals of essential soma plan is to look to the adjacent freeway at opportunity to create open-space and the proposed changes would help implement this enabling projects to meet their open-space requirements at a further distance and or as they originally drafted it specifically under or adjacent to the freeway we will talk about those amendments on that one . the second of what we're calling the substantive amendments deals with the provision, one of the provisions for pdr and one of the key sites as you recall. the soma legislation identified three key sites, these were large sites which we could allow for some flexibility in the developments with exchange for some additional community benefits.one of those sites located at 598 grams which is the location of one ofthe new parts , what we heard after the approval on both the central soma plan and actually entitlements for this particular project where they have p.d.r. requirements was an interest of being more community servingretail location . this provision would allow the project to exchange up to 15,000 square feet of retail for that p.d.r. and we should note the types of retail are very specifically defined within the code amendments. and the final and third substantive change is regarding the residual exposure requirements to the essential soma. exposure deals with a dwelling unit having like access. the exposure requirements as they are in the planning code are really gearedtowards less tense development . we revised and tailored the exposure requirements for central soma as described within the ordinance. supervisors, this concludes my presentation . again i'm joined by josh ritchie if you would like i will leave you to him for this amendment. >> supervisor preston: can you repeat the last thing you said western mark. >> matt snyder: i described all the amendments and i was indicating if you would like i will read into the record the proposed amendments that we discussed with supervisor peskin for the record that are now before you. >> supervisor preston: thank you and supervisor peskin, i couldturn the floor over to you thanks for your work on these traditional amendments . >> supervisor peskin: thank you acting chair preston advantage to mister snyder and i want to startby clarifying what happened when thiswas heard . a while back . just through the transition from when i left in december and two when chair melgar took up in january of that was lost in translation but i did subsequently get everything and very much appreciate that everything. that led to a conversation that has resulted in the amendments thatmister snyder just addressed . which there was a little bit of a misunderstanding and i thought that plan had been givento the city attorney . any event the city attorney has had a chance, thank you vicki wong for putting your eyes on the amendmentsthis morning early this afternoon . and i am happy to make those amendments which have been described by mister snyder and are before you colleagues with regard to proximity in the eastern neighborhoods. mixed-use district section two within half a mile of said principal project language so strike the words within a half-mile of said principal project or any parcel that is immediately adjacent to interstate 80 and within the boundaries of central melgar plan area, strike that language and replace it with within the central soma plan area were no greater than one quarter mile outside the central soma area boundary without regard to distance from the principal project area the distance of the off-site open-space shall be measured by the closest boundary of the principal project or as applicable to the closest edge of the central soma plan boundary and the closestportion of the off-site open-space that the first amendment i would like to offer . the second one isin subsection f , open-space provider. that last sentence in provision in subsection 3 would be changed to read as follows. operation and maintenance of this open-space shall be memorialized by a operation strategy developed by the project sponsor open-space provider. a draft of said strategy shall be presented to the planning commission by way of authorization ofplanning code section 321 applies . in all cases said strategy seldom approved bythe director of prior planning department approval of the site for building permit . that includes the amendments thati would like to move after public comment . >> supervisor preston: thank yousupervisor covid and are those your understanding substantive ? >> supervisor peskin: i would defer to cancel. i defer to deputy city internal attorney jensen or pearson . >> this is deputy city attorney jensen and those are not substantive and do not require blowback. >> supervisor preston: unless there are additional comments let's open it up for public comment.>> erica wong: checking to see if there are any colors in view. could you let us know if there are any colors ready? if you have not done so please press star 3 to be added to the q4 item number one . for those on hold continue to hold until it indicatesyou have been on muted . confirm wehave any colors into ? there are no callers into. >> supervisor preston: thank you madame clerk. supervisor peskin would you like to move your amendment. >> supervisor peskin: i would like to use , move the amendment before you and chair melgar thank mister snyder and the planning department and thanked the city attorney for their quick review of that. [please stand by] >> public comment is closed. and supervisor melgar, i'm not sure where you picked up. turning the gavel back over to you. >> supervisor melgar: i just want to say thank you so much supervisor peskin. thank you so much. i ask clerk major if you could please call the next items two and three together. >> clerk: so we haven't voted on the item. >> supervisor melgar: i'm so sorry. okay. let's vote. did someone make a motion? >> we voted right when you joined on the amendment that supervisor peskin put forward. the item has been amended. >> supervisor melgar: i see. i thought i was voting on the entire thing. since we passed the amendment. can someone make a motion. >> madam chair, i'd be happy to move the item with positive recommendation. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. madam clerk, please call the role. >> clerk: the motion is stated by supervisor peskin as amended. supervisor peskin. [roll call] >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. the item passes with unanimous recommendation to the full board. can you please call items two and three together, madam clerk. >> clerk: yes. item number two is a resolution for control to require 6 months to require a conditional use from a residential care facility and affirming appropriate findings. item number three is a hearing to receive the report on interim control to remove a residential care facility pursuant to planning code section 306.7 (i). those who wish to public comment should call the number on the screen. and press pound and pound again. if you have not done so already, please dial star 3 to line up to speak to these items. the system will indicate that you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted until we get to public comment. madam chair. >> chairman: thank you so much. i think we were joined by supervisor mandelman to hear some remarks. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. can you hear. >> this is jacob on behalf of supervisor mandelman. the items are to extend the existing controls. to a new reduce. and also the hearing on corresponding planning department report. while the supervisor does intend to move forward with the extension that came to our attention over the weekend that the resolution has drafted inadvertently left out some language monitoring to the controls that were adopted subsequent to their original adoption in 2019. so we are requesting your continuance so we can prepare the necessary amendments and move forward with extending the controls in time for them to be in effect before their expiration which is april 11th. thank you very much for your consideration. i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> chairman: colleagues, do we have any questions from mr. bentless before we take any public comment? >> no. >> chairman: okay. madam clerk, let's take public comment on the continuous request. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. please let us know if there are any callers that are ready. again, if you would like to line up for these two items, please press star, to be added to the queue and we will unmute you on our end. is there any callers in queue? >> there are no callers currently in the cue. >> clerk: thank you. >> chairman: okay. thank you so much. seeing no callers. public comment is now closed. colleagues, can we have a motion to continue items two and three to the next meeting which is monday, march 22nd. >> so moved. preston. >> chairman: great. madam clerk, can you please call the roll. >> clerk: on the motion as stated. [roll call] >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> chairman: thank you. the motion passes. madam clerk, are there any other items before us today? >> clerk: there is no further business but just for the record, since we are on audio item two and three are continued next week. >> chairman: thank you so much and thank you all very much for your patience with our technical difficulties and thank you to the staff for your heroic efforts to make this happen. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. >> thank you. >> i will call this meeting to order, march 11. this is conducted pursuant to the brown act and recent executive orders issued by the governor to reduce the risk of covid-19 transmission at public meetings. ordinarily there are strict rules for teleconferencing. the executive order has suspended those rules. as noted the agenda, members of the public may observe the teleconference meeting via sfgovtv and they may also call the public comment phone number. i would like to welcome the members who are watching this live on sfgovtv. mr. secretary. please call the roll. >> thank you, vice chair gee. rafael mandelman is joining usury placing matt haney. director lipkin will not be present. please respond when i call your name. forbes. >> present. >> baptist present. >> mandelman. >> here. >> director shaw. >> here. >> director tumlin. >> here. >> vice chair gee. >> here. >> we have a quorum. i will call your next item. 3. communications. the number is on the screen. director mandelman has to leave at 10:00 a.m. we will rearrange items to ensure his participation. any other communications from the board at this time? seeing none, i will call your next item. 4, new and/or old business. i am not aware of any. next item. executive director's report. >> good morning, directors. i would like to welcome supervisor mandelman filling in the seat held by matt haney who resigned february 18th. i look forward to working with you. as i stated i am thrilled by your enthusiasm to deliver the vision for the transbay program. yesterday congress passed $1.9 trillion american rescue package to be signed tomorrow by president biden to provide much needed funds to transit operators. we join the m.t.c. and transit operators in thanking speaker pelosi in getting this package passed. we are working for formula funding for the pandemic. we respond to federal opportunities on the horizon. we will be ready with ask when requirements are released. we work with our federal advocates to take advantage of these opportunities. there are three categories we are looking into. the infrastructure later this year, earmark requests focusing on project funding for transit center capital items and grant opportunities. consolidated rail infrastructure and security grant program. we are optimistic re-opening the city. we are now in the red tier. we have heard good news to move to orange in the next two weeks. red allows opening indoor and outdoor activities. we are continuing to work with our parks programming partner and plan to offer activities in the parks as allowed by the health order. john will speak more in detail. we will continue to monitor the safer at home to ensure the collective efforts to reduce spread of covid-19. adhering to guidance with the health officer and working with transit operators and tenants. we will continue to provide visitors and commuters the most up-to-date information. additionally we will monitor security and safety of riders and visitors. monthly our security team holds monthly meeting with the operators and personnel from the transportation security administration. remain engaged and informed on trends and topics to impact the transit center. >> we issued r.f.p. as our current term ends on june 30th. it allows two additional one year terms it is a reset considering the budget constraints. we continue to advance downtown project with patterners. -- partners. over the last month we provided briefings to the transportation chair to introduce to the project. we plan to engage the federal delegation this month. additionally, with chair chang we are providing briefings to the supervisors including president walton and the newly-elected chair and board director mandelman. we have provided briefings to regional commissioners at m.t.c. newly-elected chair. mountain view mayor and santa clara supervisor and the oakland mayor. we have more briefings scheduled to provide information later in the agenda. this past tuesday the san francisco county transportation authority unanimously approved on the first reading for the prop k $6.2 million to advance the project. it will be brought to this board for approval in april upon final approveval on march 23. i want to thank the staff for working with us for this allocation. continuing in the spirit and intent of the partnership developed under the rail program, memorandum of inning. they will provide additional information as well. as mentioned last month the high-speed rail authority shared revised draft 2020 business plan. provided support during the comment period that ends tomorrow. we also showed support and sent in support letter for the joint assembly informational hearing on the plan and budget allocation yesterday. we join the partners in voicing support for this project. lastly, we concluded recruitment at the end of february. later we will report on the effort and pool of candidates. i want to recognize the outgoing four members of the cac. we have appreciated their questions and insightful feedback. they helped us shape the transit center, services in the project. we want to thank them for the years of dedication. directors you have the quarterly financial reports provided by the chief financial officer before you in your packet. she is available to respond to questions you may have. that concludes my report. i will be happy to answer any questions before i provide the facility update. >> thank you. any questions from the directors? i don't see any hands raised. i don't see anybody waiving. >> seeing none, vice chair gee. >> any public comment. >> no public comment at this time. >> thank you. >> good morning. very quick update. i will start and i know we are pressed for time. as mentioned by moving in the red tier we are able to move fitness sf from outdoor pods to indoor environment. they are indoors now. all of the pods and equipment have been moved back inside. they are thrilled to be back moving toward regular operations. as i mentioned in the last meeting with our neighbor in fremont finishing up today and tomorrow work on the 40th floor with window replacements. you can see window washing on the right and the exciting adventure on the left. that will be done by the end of day friday. we are working with adventures on preparing for programming schedule for the park. the sign of return of downtown and the city. april will have a soft opening and programming. working closely with the sales force committee on that process. we will have a little more activities anticipated but a full schedule already for june for activities in the park. retail leasing. updates on active engagements. some not so good news relative to the food and beverage kiosk vendor. they have due to local corporate decisions made elsewhere to pause discussions with us on a lease. we are back on the market for that site. there are other interested parties. i have confidence we will find a vendor at the time we are ready to serve food and beverage at the park. 232 was a pause button pushed by a prospect not only here but four other locations we were investigating throughout california. we were very far along in negotiations. good news we have shown the space to other interested parties. we have something that looks very interesting we are pursuing. i am hoping to have more information in the next meeting. good news on the first floor is we continue solid discussions with six of our first floor vacancies. a lot of interest in that, which is amazing given the amount of second generation space currently available in san francisco. walk right in. juice bar looks promising, breakfast food operation is an opportunity. it is our retail and restaurants. more on that. no changes to the occupancy 78% from last meeting. tenant improvements. spring fertility signage up. we have received the permits and tweets to happen within the next couple days and opening by the end of the month. that is good news on that front. lastly, relative to our few tenants. no changes there. we are targeting q3 and 4 opening and aligning our work with those programs so that patron age is back. they are open. happy to entertain questions. >> thank you. any questions from the directors? i don't see any hands raised. donald, any hands? >> no hands raised and no member of the public to provide public comment. call your next item. >> please. >> directors 6. cac update. we have the chair to address you on this item. >> good morning. i am the cac. members of the cac voice excitement in the vote on tuesday. we are excited. cac appreciated and took time to acknowledge and thank the out going cac members which were highlighted by director gonzalez. presentations on the fourth and king street rail yards were well received by the cac members and from the san francisco planning department addressed the questions and comments regarding topics such as the fourth and king street rail yard, options for moving, concept options, options for the space around where it will be, it was pointed out that it is environmentally clear and we also spoke about examples of similar projects around the world including new york hudson yards. one member mentioned it would diminish the character of the neighborhood. vertical development would require environmental plans. the presentation regarding the dpx study generated support for the key points. there was discussion of the completion date and acknowledgment of funding delays in the covid-19 pandemic. cac members voiced support for the funding ask that steven's presentation included. jackson spoke of giving thought to the surrounding urban design. there was acknowledgment of the efforts to maintain tenants and get new tenants during the pandemic times. they discussed future agenda items. this concludes my cac report. >> thank you for your report. directors, any questions? any public comment, donald. >> there is none at this time. i will call your next item. >> please. members item 11 is the election of chair and vice chair which will be done in two-parts. we will take nominations for chair. >> somebody needs to be chair. >> i would like to second the nomination. [ inaudible ] >> any other nominations? >> seeing none, do we have a motion to reelect director gee as chair. >> so moved tumlin. >> second, forbes. >> thank you. item 11. first director tumlin and second forbes. roll call vote to direct director gee as chair. >> donald, before you go ahead. public comment. >> we have a caller. >> thank you. good morning. the point of order. number 7 public comment. >> we will come back to that. >> thank you. my apologies for the interruption. >> quite all right. >> thank you. i will now proceed to take a roll call vote at this time. >> director forbes. >> aye. >> director baptist. >> aye. >> director mandelman. >> aye. >> director shaw. >> aye. >> director tumlin. >> aye. >> vice chair gee. >> aye. >> the motion to elect director gee is passed. [indiscernable] >> i would like to nominate director mandelman vice chair. >> second tumlin. >> any other nominations? seeing none, i will check for public comment. please let in the first caller. >> hello. thank you for the opportunity. the first thing i would like to do this morning is to welcome supervisor mandelman to the party, sir. second thing i would like to do is thank chair gee for offering public comment. this is a welcome development and truly appreciated. thank you, sir. the comment on the report is that the best location for caltrain storage is the train box in the transit center itself, not anywhere else. thank you. >> thank you. >> do we have a motion to elect director mandelman as vice chair? >> so moved. >> second. >> vice chair by baptist first and second forbes. i will take a vote for director mandelman. >> forbes. >> aye. >> director baptist. >> aye. >> mandelman. >> aye. >> shaw. >> aye. >> tumlin. >> aye. >> chair gee. >> aye. >> motion to elect director mandelman as chair has pats. congratulations to you both. >> if i may take a moment here. colleagues, thank you for the honor to serve as chair. director mandelman, welcome to the board. i look forward to serving together in your multiple roles as we all have on the board. it is exciting to move forward as well as the san francisco rail program. welcome. i look forward to working together. thank you to my colleagues on the board. a lot will happen over the next year. >> mr. secretary. let's jump back to item 7. >> that's correct, sir. >> public comment. an opportunity for the public to address the authority on matters not on today's calendar. we will wait a couple seconds before we proceed. seeing none, i will proceed with the agenda. item 8 is approving the recommended applicant to the citizens advisory committee. the communications and legislative affairs managers will present. >> good morning, directors. tjpa citizens advisory committee is to advise the board of directors. representing diversity it includes 15 members serving two years with a max of three consecutive years. terms are staggered so seven seats expire in odd years and eight regular years. we have seven seats open this year. january to february we conducted outreach which included promotion on social media along with patterners. the tjpa received nine applications, three from current members who reapplied. after reviewing all applications, staff recommends the board of supervisors reappoint three members as they have been valuable members and have important institutional knowledge. staff recommends that the board of directors appoint four new members which total seven of the eight. the four are. the city-wide business brian larkin, labor seats mandez. bob and for the expertise in real estate development staff recommends sally stall. the ac transit san francisco seat is open. we did not receive any applications for this seat. we are conducting additional outreach to the transit rider community to encourage individuals qualifying to apply. we are working to fill the seat as soon as possible. i have been in touch with director shaw and industry to encourage qualified applicants to apply. we hope to come back to recommend an applicant for consideration. we have new proposed members here. with us this morning and i would be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. directors, any questions? >> this is director shaw. >> i just want to say that i did reach out from lilly and i have put -- i responded last night there. is one person who may be able to do it. we are doing more reach out. we are pursuing it. thank you. >> thank you, director shaw that is interesting dynamic with companies going to hybrid work models there may be fewer daily riders and more hybrid riders. it is a new dynamic we may need to think through. any other questions from directors? it does look like we have some members of the public who would like to have their hands raised. >> please let in the first caller. >> some of them are proposed candidates. >> first member is newly appointed cac member bob. [indiscernable] please let him in, please. >> can you hear me now? >> yes. i am primarily interested in two aspects of this. one, getting the trains into the basement of terminals. i have been on the caltrain and the high-speed rail advisory committees for some time. that is where i will bring expertise. the other issue i want to raise and be concerned about is financing. i remember a plan some years ago that high rise buildings are expanded buildings would have increased property value tax going to help finance this building and the operations. we just see sales force not into a big lease and other buildings are unleased in some floors. what if any effect will that lessened tenant rent activity in nearby buildings have on the financing of operations of the transbay center? finally, i will ask if i have a question, do i send it through the cc chair jason or to ms. gonzalez. i am not sure how long it will take for my question to get to whoever we want to get information from. that will be an administrative detail, but i want to jump in ready for the april 6th meeting. thank you. i will stay on until you decide if you want to ask me questions or comments. thank you. >> thank you, mr. plan hold. as we conclude the formal appointment today will be orientation for all members so that those administrative issues can be resolved and clarified. thank you for asking your hand and volunteering. >> next caller, please. >> thank you. very briefly. i have known bryan rocking for years. you will not believe the contribution he will make. he will take the tjpa to the next level. i have no doubt about it. thank you. >> that concludes. >> is there one more? >> no, that concludes. i will now take a motion. is there a motion? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> item 8. director forbes. >> aye. >> baptist. >> aye. >> mandelman. >> alternate at this point. >> chang. >> aye. >> shaw. >> aye. >> director tumlin. >> aye. >> chair gee. >> aye. >> there are six ayes. item 8 is approved on first reading. >> if you would pass on the congratulations of the board to the new cac members, please. and thank those that served previously for service and those that want to continue to do this. really appreciate it. >> item 9. approving the minutes of the february 11, 2021 meeting minutes. >> motion for approval? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> there is no public comment. there is a first by director shaw and second by director tumlin. >> director forbes. >> aye. >> director baptist. >> aye. >> director chang. >> aye. >> director shaw. >> aye. >> director tumlin. >> aye. >> chair gee. >> aye. >> there are six ayes. item nine is approved on first reading. >> thank you, mr. secretary. directors, item 10 san francisco pen anyone larail program executive committee update. >> thank you so much, mr. secretary. good morning chair gee, it is a pleasure to congratulate you on your election to the chair. >> thank you. >> happy to report out this month, directors, on the activities of our steering committee and integrated project team. as you mentioned the outreach work we will go over that. she covered that earlier. we will have an update on our funding plan and 2021 coordination and of course focus on the schedule which then vice chair gee asked as well last month about. really it is a pleasure to join the team on the briefing for regional commissioners at the m.t.c. i thank the commissioner for facilitating those. we have met with four to date. i believe the additional ones we have planned include the mayor from san jose and commissioners connelly and rabbit from marin and sonoma to share information and collaborate on whether it is funding opportunities or other planning activities relating to the high interest and enthusiasm for the project. citizens advisory committee, of course. we appreciate in terms of the project director for joining, jessie taylor for that that occurred for the first read on tuesday and completed at the end of the month. no issues with that. it was smooth. we appreciated folks coming out for public comment. state legislative hearings. as gonzalez mentioned is going smoothly one yesterday and another one on the 16th. both agencies have joined to submit comments of support for the high-speed rail business plan 2020. that does include the valley to valley strategy and request for prop 1a funds from the legislature bond funds to help complete that segment and project development activities up to the bay area. on the fta side we have been following up on the kickoff meeting with fta a couple months ago. that has involved the travel demand modeling work. that is moving well. we are seeing consistent with that work. terms of funding, this is the snapshot from the conversations we have been having with fta and commissioners around the bay area. this is the high level outline how we are looking at federal and state and regional and local sources on the project. cost in the process of update by the team but we do believe it will increase up to this level between 4.5 to 5.5 billion subject to the work underway why we look to see what is the minimum amount of project definition and cost. does that may being sense? for initial service. budgeting and funding purposes we are looking at this type of structure. the fta being the largest and most important one before us potential opportunity to ask for up to $2.5 billion. that is the range we shared with fta. this fits well with bay areas already underway new starts program. capital improvement grant to san jose phase one and two as well as full capacity program. along with bart to san jose the caltrain rail extension is a priority in the bay area. state sources are listed here. high-speed rail sources, i believe the high-speed rail business plan identifies the future contribution $550 million not committed yet but the idea behind that line item. regional measure 3 as mentioned before $325 million for the project being litigated. we hope to see that concluded soon. other sources could include the caltrain measure and/or other future regional funding sources such as discussed a few years ago with the 1cent sales measure. the local prop k sales tax. we do hope and plan to go to the voters next year to reauthorize the 30 years at the half cent level. as well as other local sources that we are tracking including private sources as well. the picture of the larger amount of funding breaks down to committed plan and additional sources. under the orange $1 billion committed is a good start. those are familiar to many of you, of course. the middle planned funds, yellow box identifies ones in the functioning plan and re-confirmed. that is something underway right now by the team. these include the ones just mentioned and potential facility charge or train flat fee not agreed yet but it has been carried over from the prior funding plan and will be discussed with the other additional sources which we hope to find in the remaining years before we apply for the federal new start funding formally. in the order of half to a billion dollars. the next slide will share what the ideas for those may be. immediately in fact we have an opportunity to provide some input to congress in the congressional delegate and statewide senators to see if we might be able to obtain funds from the infrastructure bill congress is taking up since covid is signed. that will be our focus to support them on this ask for near term infrastructure bill funding. federal reauthorization will be tain up. those will be merged. we will be prepared to work on whatever package does advance in the congress over the spring and summer. locally, we are forecasting and re-confirming through the existing sources the city sources on the project tax increasement as well as looking at potential future revenues such as the study we are undertaking. that is a potential source for this project. the joint development opportunities as well as private concession opportunities to participate in the project is something that we will study as well. regionally i mentioned these earlier. we will continue working through this to hope to bring it back to you in a couple of months for a formal update. here is our schedule. it is sort of a busy slide. the orange line tracks with the federal transit administration process to request entry to project development this fall. this is something jessie taylor reported last month to you all. the idea would be to request entry to the engineering phase-in february of 23 to prepare full funding grant to the fta by august of 2023. that would set up an agreement funding agreement by spring of 2025. along the way we are rapidly trying to prepare the project fixed component utilities and things needed right-of-way, advance design so we can position them for earlier funding opportunities such as federal ones i just mentioned underway this summer. if we are successful the construction could be sooner. the interim project director can speak to that. what is here is what this may look like if we go and you should choose to direct us to move toward this more accelerated schedule for august 20-23 submittal. the work plan shows that funding date the middle of august 2024. as we discussed last month hoping to accelerate efforts by a year. the advance planning in the current phase will be covered by the ta funding we have just added to our board. that is the project team through the calendar year. there after for the next phase of project development we are needing to assemble $25 million through the process and design phase-in particular. you can see what the project budget requires for engineering and implementation. turning to our planning and early design work. last month we mentioned the league 21 announcements about future planning and vision and that was the opportunity to brief the tjpacac. this is one of the slides we want to bring forward for your information. a lot of interest in the slide when we went to the cac. this is the future connections from the train box eastward across the bay as part of the future connection link 21. there are many conceptiontual options studied last summer and they are legend. three here are the ones you see in red abpurple and blue. these are potential alignments. each has pros and cons. there was work on the horizontal al alignment. red is the one that has the path that is most intuitive but has impacts for some buildings in yellow. it would then kind of go east from there. the other two go southward. the purple and blue are going southward and eastward down to sphere and beal, but one hads the radius high speed rail requires. it is on the statewide system. the other one shows tighter turn that can potentially avoid right-of-way impacts. this is an early indication of the options. the other options bend backward along the original line up and then head eastward from there. that is like a stub-in operation. we will continue to work on these and take your guidance on that work. here i invite the interim project director to cover the next few scheduled slides and we will be happy to answer questions. >> good morning, directors. thank you, chair gee. at our last board meeting you asked me to come back to the board with information whether or not we were on schedule. i am happy to report we are. this slide and the next slide contains all of the deliverables on the currently authorized work paprogram -- work programming. there is quite a bit we have done as you can see. i then keyed to show what is on schedule in green. completed in bold. i also wanted to include in the last column whether or not the items were on the critical path. for those in the public that might be listening. those are activities where if they are late they can impact the overall schedule. other activities not on the critical path can move in the schedule to some degree without impacting the schedule. sometimes we dual allow -- we wo then allow those to move. starting in june we have been crossing off all of the deliverables we committed to do over the course of the notice to proceed, one, initial allocation from s.f.c.t.a. we go to the second slide and look a little more to the future. you can see that as you start to look in the center of the slide with our operations analysis, preliminary results that are driving an important part of the phasing plan, that work was completed a bit ahead of schedule. we planned for march and got the information from the operators in january allowing us to proceed with driving towards completion of our next phasing workshop with the integrated program management team in april. that is third from the bottom. we are very much on schedule to do that, completing the business case as well, which is an important companion to the phasing plan. finally, of course, the phasing plan and results and recommendations that we will bring to the itmt in june to the executive steering committee in june and tjpa board of directors in august. that is all on schedule that we had originally set for ourselves back at the last june in order to complete the phasing study in august. i will turn it back to chair gee. susan chang. >> next slide, please. i think that was the last slide. >> you have the look ahead. >> the look ahead here is what you can expect us to bring in the coming year for information and action. this is consistent within the tjpa application for the funds pending final approval. we have accelerated master schedule coming in april. this would be subject to your continued guidance to pursue this accelerated schedule in may the phase-in study work. continuing focus on the risk register. what is exciting our new rebranding we will have outreach and update in june for the project. capital funding plan is where we get to update all of those resumes i mentioned. in july we will come to you for information and ultimately for action in august. of course, that is when we take up the phasing plan recommendations. that is a critical decision for the project to find what that is and companion piece is the business case that lays out benefits, costs and trade-offs for each of the options that were examined in the phasing plan. once we have that decision we can then execute more directly abfocus efforts in terms of funding and f t amend application for funding for the federal government. project delivery study we are getting going with tjpa. all agencies will look at the ways to procure the project such as design build, progressive design build, construction manager, general contractor or public private partnership. we are happy to answer questions. >> director chang, thank you for the update. i think those last several slides were a lot easier to understand for more people as well as the look ahead for the board. those are great way to present the information rather than a schedule with a bunch of colors and lines. good move. thank you for that. directors, any questions? i don't see any hands raised. any hands waiving? >> i don't see any hands waving or raised. >> we have a public comment, at least one. >> please let in the first caller. >> thank you, directors for your information. there is no way for me to know if my hand is up. i apologize for the earlier mishap. some of you may know, i mailed the sfta board of directors on january 25. i raised significant issues for the aspects of the project. received a response dated february 24th, less than 12 hours before last tuesday's board meeting. i will reply over the weekend. tjpa staff has plenty of time to respond to my response for $6.2 million prop k aplocations. i want to give you a heads up on my response. i will be discussing 21 slides extensively. specifically that if you look at the slide for memories there are six slides. only two of the six strikes make it out of the center. i will be pleased to show you how that was addressed. it is a direct result and that is the problem. good news side i am pleased to report on the building on the direct route which is the route in red in the slide where there is approximately 18 months ago and i am pleased to report we don't have to take a single building down. thank you. >> thank you. any other comments? >> that concludes public comment. >> directors, any final comments on this report? >> one quick question. as bart is linked to the 21 project. the region is interested in linking the downtown extension with a transbay project. what i wonder is if the studies that we are doing are looking at the opportunities for synergies there. specifically to what degree would we be able to save costs on the downtown extension if the transbay terminal were through a running station versus terminal station? without having to change the environmental documents, can we save money or introduce -- it creates interesting opportunities. i want to make sure that is addressed. >> thank you so much for the question. i will turn it to the interim project director. those are both covered in the study goes to a degree. >> thank you. >> director, we are in fact as part of our phase-in study operations analysis looking at the effect of a through running station on the infrastructure required to support the dtx under both scenarios. stub end is the current plan and through running if bart and capital corridors select that and it is constructed. the major question i suppose is whether under through running scenario we need a full three track connection between fourth and town send and the throat itself. that is part of the operational analysis that is being conducted, and we will speak to that in our phase-in report. >> thank you. >> any other questions from directors? not seeing any. >> there is a member of the public raised their hand. allow that person to provide comment. >> sure. >> can you please let in the caller. >> please state your name. your two minutes begins now. >> this is jim patrick from patrick and company. i want to direct your attention to the comments made. is there a through station or terminal station? those are strategic stations to do with the routing. i call your attention to the letter which submitted and came back from the cta board that said thank you very much. we have already sent environmental impact report. thank you. good-bye. it was wrong. i thought these ideas now is the time to evaluate these ideas, not based on good design. we have spent money on it. you are not going to design it again for 100 years. i think it needs rethought some more. i direct your attention to what he has to say. thank you. >> thank you. >> if i might clarify the caller referred to a response. this is a letter the staff prepared. we transmitted that to him from the ta on behalf of the tjpa. >> thank you. any other comments from directors? director chang? thank you for the update. good report. it was easy to understand for most people. that is great. that is the most important part. we need to understand where we are going, where we have been and the work plan is on schedule. congratulations. a lot of work being done in a short amount of time. thank you. unless there is anything else for the board. that concludes the businesses for today. the gift of free time. i am happy to give the gift of free time today. thank you to the public and staff. we will see you at the next meeting in april. >> thank you. >> president lopez: regular meeting of the board of education of is now called to order. roll call please. [roll call]

Related Keywords

United States ,Missouri ,Washington ,Mountain View ,California ,Sonoma ,San Francisco Park ,Bayview ,North Beach ,Switzerland ,San Francisco ,American ,Swiss ,Collin Schmidt ,Cathy Howard ,Julie Dunn ,Jackie Flynn ,Mister Snyder ,Don Franklin ,Erica Wong ,Newyork Hudson ,Liz Farrell ,William Hall ,Gee Rafael ,Kirt Grimes ,Jim Patrick ,Matt Snyder ,Matt Haney ,Susan Chang ,Nate Ford ,Greg Miller ,Brian Kennedy ,Jessie Taylor ,Linda Schafer ,Diane Feinstein ,