Commissioner wolfram commissioner hyland commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda and commissioner pearlman thank you, commissioners first is the to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, i have no speaker card. Is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on any item not on accident agendas if so please step forward. I dont know if this is within our purview i thought there was a couple other people here im not a public speaker so im just here because a group of people that concerned about the palace of fine arts i want you all to be aware people are building you know community to try to stop them considering a hotel, restaurant, very commercial for those spaces for the exploratorium what it is very upsetting since youre the Historic Preservation Commission Im hoping there is something that at least talk amongst yourselves is it seems wrong seems wrong
Commissioners, if theres nothing further to commission matters item 3 president s report and amazements. No announcements. Consideration the drifting for the Architectural Review Committee the approval of the draft minutes for the meeting and the Cultural Heritage assets november 18, 2015, there are no speaker cards. Any comments on the minutes. Yeah. A couple on the draft minutes on item number 6 the architects name charles is blowingcy not b l o s z i e. Correct. I think he wants to be identified a question on number 8 about the van ness Rapid Transit on the action it talks about seek a straight co a about 6 months of trolley bowels but i thought we talked about the business shelter itself was something that would come back to us so that should be added both of those things. Okay. Did anybody not public wish to comment oh, sorry. Im shelly i want to clarify the 39 about the final motion the conditions concerning the bus shelter was in the draft motion the only 6 months for the trolle
In the next year is looking at stream lining the process and it is nice to have this user interface where we have the portal now that is the single goto place for the Business Owners but we as a city need to look at the processes that are involved for our business whens they deal with the permitting and licenses. There is, yeah, i cant say enough that you cant just throw technology on top of a flawed process. You want to look at, you know, i am sure that we could just study what we have now and map it out. And identify some of the efficiency gaps, and maybe making the smallest of changes could have a huge impact on the way that Business Owners experience their dealings with the city, perhaps something that used to take 30 days to go through, maybe we could identify areas where we could save time, perhaps we could cut it down to even ten days if possible and so i think that it is pertinent for us to look at the processes, identify the efficiency gaps and make the recommendations for imp
Director of transportation and i am happy to be here and i do have a brief presentation. But i can walk through and i do want to be mindful, and not being too repetitive of what i covered last time and the general theme and framework is really the same, what is before you with these two items are really just the two pieces of legislation that are introduced by all eleven members of the board of supervisors with support of the mayor that would allow the board to consider putting a 500 million general Obligation Bond on the ballot for this november. The way that the mechanics of it work, there are two pieces of legislation and one resolution and one ordinance but it is really for the same single bond. So, if you like i would be happy to walk quickly through the presentation and be happy to answer any questions. So i think that i covered this last time some what but we have pretty significant needs in the Transportation System. And including the assets regardless of the mode that you trav