Uncertainty about use of word, vagueness in order for that to disappear prior to this Group Hearing it on the 29th because i do not think this document is clear because of those things im observing. Okay. Any additional comments . Commissioners there say motion and a second to continue items as proposed, specifically item one to december 13, item six to december 6, and item 11 to november 29. Commissioner tone. Aye. Commissioner borden. Aye. Commissioner hillis. Aye. Commissioner moore. Aye. Commissioner sugaya. No. Commissioner avery with commissioner with you. Commissioner. Aye. That passes. All things under the consent calendar are routine by the commission and will be acted upon one roll call vote by the commission. There is no discussion unless the staff or public requests and in that case will be removed from the consent calendar and considered at a future hearing. Case dolores terrace and request for condominium conversion. Case 343 frederick street and request for condominium c
In 2010 the public process has not been very good. Many of the people have been very concerned and pioneers of ceqa were not even noticed of these changes. The state legislature as you may have known was in august of this year there was a proposal at the last two weeks of the state legislative session to also frankly ram through ceqa legislation that was not vetted well. The state legislature decided to not take up the measure, but will be looking at ceqa as a much more holistic way in the coming legislative year. I suggest that and we suggest that San Francisco take a similar approach that all means by which projects are approved or moved forward need to be looked at. Ceqa in itself is not the only approval that projects require are you speaking to the continuance or the actual topic . Okay. I will support we support the continuance. Thank you very much. And thats basically the message, but the measure i think is different from what was proposed in 2006 and 2010. It needs to be looked
Time, but absent that date its quite possible that we might not have any input from planning before it goes to the board of supervisors for consideration, and i think having a hearing is more important than having none, so i would move that we continue items one, item number six to the dates slated for those. Actually number six is to the sixth and item number 11 to the 29th. I will second that motion but we will have more discussion. Okay. Commissioner moore. I am glad that we are considering continuing, and i would actually ask that we continue beyond the 29th of november partially because the package that was given to us is significantly incomplete. Im not just commenting on the way it was listed in the public noticing but i would like to address that in order to fully understand it. Stakeholder groups need to be contacted and talked to. The commission itself i think just needs for the clarity compare the writings of 2006, 2010 and 2012 and really evaluate whether addressing a admin
Really evaluate whether addressing a administrative correction but i dont think it is. I received at a minimum up to 10 accordance on the matter. And by lawyers and all of the comment his the tone and message of consistency and i have to take quite seriously. Its not just about me being a commissioner and out smart everybody and the public needs to inform me about what the law says and what is going to happen under eir and ceqa law and i believe there are serious shortcuts being made here and addition to finding document full of vague language, innuendo, and conflikz of terms and terms are exchanged and dont mean anything. Planning, Planning Commission, planning department. Im not sure what it means and i could go on and on and refers to agencies in lower case without specifying who the agencies or public bodies would be that have to weigh in. The sequence of how meetings appeals, et cetera are described for three or four different appeals is totally confusing, and myself basically req
Renting out their apartments while they are away on vacation or business in the field of sharable housing, but that is a separate issue. I would ask for your support for the legislationing in front of us. Colleagues any other questions or comments can we take this same house, same call . Resolution passes on first reading. Item 26 ordinance amending the San Francisco planning code. Colleagues same house, same call . This is passed [ gavel ]. Item 27 ordinance amending the administrative code by adding section 10e. 4 to monitor San Franciscos Housing Preservation and production polices and goals. Colleagues any discussion on this item . Supervisor wiener . Thank you mr. President. I dont know if the author was planning to make introductory comments. I would be happy to defer. Supervisor olague would you like to make introductory comments . [ inaudible ] supervisor wiener. Thank you very much, mr. President. I voted against this item in committee and clearly at articulated what my concer