Public comment testimony that are not solid facts. This body transitions. Supervisor yee will no longer be the supervisor. Things get lost. I want to go on the record early. I believe avalon bay will create a lot of problems for us, those of us who have relationships in labor. Many times our labor partners have come raising concerns that they havent hired union labor to do the job. Im talking something that is years down the line. But i just think that that funding that this is just not the right direction we need to go in and we need to reevaluate. Supervisor yee did a great job getting city college free. And now we have all these people that want to go there. We need to be mindful and respectful of the people who have been living around the college for generations. And weve heard from our citizens advisory commission, a policy body used to advise us. They are against it. I dont know anybody in support of this other than the Police DepartmentPlanning Department. Im going to be voting no on this and i hope you will consider joining me. Chair peskin commissioner yee, any final words as this is the result of your end tip allocation . Supervisor yee no. I appreciate commissioner cohens point of view. But as i mentioned, to me its the beginning of a discussion and i think the frameworks there. The issues of parking, the issue of improving the transportation really does need further study. One of the things ive been pretty consistent about in terms of discussing with the balboa Reservoir Development is that between them and city college and the city, we need to city down and solve future sort of parking issues. And that if it doesnt get solved, theres not going to be any development. So, i know people, whether at city college or the developers, in having informal discussions, they have taken it very seriously. Its be on the agenda with the developers pretty much up front and talking about these issues. Have they come up with solutions . Not yet. Were several years away from that development. Has city college come up with their final analysis . No. They are only beginning because their doing their Facilities Master Plan right now. So, youre correct in saying that if this were the only thing thats going to be used to solve these issues, i would say i would agree with you. But to me, its not this document does not even try to say it solves everything thats going to be in the future. Some of the things that ive talked about and this seems like, again, informally. I mentioned the shuttle. I mentioned one of the things i didnt mention i think one of the residents mentioned it. If we are going to go into residential parking permits, im going to ask, for instance, for them to pay for that because it is forcing certain areas further away from city college but still in the neighborhoods that will have students parking further away. There are many things in discussion. Can city college, for instance im not going to speak for city college. But my observation is they have also other land around city college that can be developed as a parking lot. So, thats my comment. Im going to go ahead and ask my colleagues to support this sort of framework piece so we can move on and have both the developers and city college come up with concrete solutions. Chair peskin commissioner safai, do i see your name . Supervisor safai yes. I think these are all good points brought up today. I have been listening as supervisor yee, our districts are bound by this project in this area and it is a traffic nightmare. Theres a lot of concern. I know the balboa cac and city college cac and others have reservations about this. But i think some of the reservations arent necessarily about this particular plan, but theyre more about the long term plan. And i think both supervisor yee and ive heard very strongly that theres desires for certain things that because this is going to be a development agreement, ultimately, those things can be negotiated into the final package, such as a shuttle, the amount of parking and otherwise. I think the concerns of the neighbors are very real and this will have a big impact. But i think theres a lot of opportunity and i know supervisor yee has been leading this and ive been kind of backing him up in many ways. So, i feel comfortable moving forward with this. I do have a lot of reservations that supervisor cohen brought up. But i think we can finalize that. Chair peskin commissioner yee. Supervisor yee i also want to mention that i have been asking ting this is a ta meeting, one of the things thats really long term and but im willing to push the discussion. Ive pushed it with the mline in terms of potentially moving from whether its from the st. Francis circle or from west portal tunnel to go under ground. And so, with that discussion, i also was broadening the discussion that we study the city study the possibility of keeping the k under ground from the same point. And that would to me if you put the kline under ground all the way to the bart station, that to me would really reduce the Traffic Congestion around that area. Again, its only possibilities. Maybe when they study it, they will find out that my statement was totally ridiculous or not. If we dont study it, we wont know. Chair peskin all right. Is that a motion commissioner yee . Supervisor yee yes. Chair peskin is there a second for that . Seconded by commissioner kim on the item. A roll call please. Commissioner breed. Thank you. I have some questions about outreach specifically because there is information in the resolution that talks about an extensive outreach process as it relates to this particular plan with community input. And i was hoping to get more information on the follow through specifically that was highlighted in the resolution here. Specifically based on public input received after this Advisory Committee meeting. Commissioner yee requested concerns expressed by members of the public and resulting feedback was in the final report. I just want a little more information about that additional outreach and what was incorporated into the report as a result of that outreach. Mr. Shaw. Thank you commissioner breed. At commissioner yees request, we did return to the community a number of times to hear the concerns. I think part of the challenge was how do we stick with whats the written scope of a Transportation Demand management while acknowledging a lot of Community Concerns that maybe a tdm cant address. We changed a lot of the tdm recommendations or refined them to make sure the communitys concerns are addressed. For example, the data challenge thats been mentioned. There was Additional Data collected a second time and then recommendations were added to refine Data Collection in the future when city college or balboa reservoir go for their analysis. And for things that the tdm cant really address, we wanted to make sure that those concerns were included. For example, safety at transit stops at night is a significant concern. That needs to be addressed at transit stops throughout the neighborhood and beyond. And so, it was included in here. But this is not a capital plan. And so, theres limits to what the tdm framework could do. We tried to focus on strategies that could provide a foundation for and acknowledge those that it couldnt. One last comment. Response that the third or fourth edit i think we invited Many Community members to come in to the Planning Department and workshop and talk about ways to get more of Community Concerns into the document and youll see that in the most recent version. And i think part of the concern is because the plan is the plan. It talks somewhat about community input, but it just seems as if theres a plan that was put together with certain recommendations. But it appears that many of the recommendations are based on the Planning Departments recommendation of the community of what could be done and that information is actually whats put into the report. Is that accurate . I think it comes from a variety of sources of input. The recommendations were from the consultant. So, it started with best practices and their knowledge of San Francisco. There was input from city College Staff at the time. There was input from the two cacs and then that last round of edits focused on a lot more details around data and around so things beyond tdm. We acknowledge theres always more outreach that needs to be done and our intent and hope is that the process and the feedback that weve gotten about the process will inform the future planning. So, when we have an implementable plan, a real plan that the developers at city college are obligated to fulfill, that outreach will be done, reflecting all the comments we have heard over the last two years. Can you talk a little more about the outreach to city college specifically . Because i heard in the comments that there was only one presentation at their board meeting. But can you give me clarity in terms of the board meeting, the students, the staff and the people impacted most by this. Sure. So, the document was first initiated and scoped if this late 2015. So, since that point, there were ongoing coordination meetings and vetting with facilitys staff at city college. And we were happy to present at many times i think at the same time part of the challenge was city college was going through their own facilitys master plan effort. So, there were limited opportunities for the city to present. We are happy to return. Another note and opportunity is i think the facilitys master plan is going through a reboot. Theres a new chancellor. Theres a new project manager dedicated just to the reservoir and parking concerns. And we are very excited to work with them. So, i think all those changes represent an opportunity to improve on the outreach process. And i just want for clarity, this is just a guide. This is not written in stone. There could be changes as any project progresses. But this was basically used a road map to have a better understanding of what the challenges are in the area, what some recommendations can be to fix those challenges. But theres still a lengthy process associated with moving anything forward of this magnitude in general. So, i just wanted to make sure that that was clear. That is absolutely correct. If i could just add one more point. I think the framework created the space or the opportunity for really an unprecedented collaboration. I dont think theres has been to this point in my knowledge around the planning or transportation issue, the consistent coordination between staff of both city college and the city. So, i think its a big step forward and again, its not the only step. Were just starting and it has created a foundation for more collaboration. Thank you. Chair peskin commissioner cohen. Supervisor cohen thank you. Mr. Shaw, you said there was a second meeting, an outreach meeting that you reached out to folks in the city college community. When was that . The second city College Meeting . Im not there were a number of city College Staff meetings. Supervisor cohen okay. Maybe i need to clarify. There was the one presentation mentioned to the board of trustees and the additional meetings were primarily for neighbors or folks coming to the reservoir cac meetings. Supervisor cohen and what was the attendance like . The cac meetings are always well attended. The smaller workshops were intended to have neighbor hood representatives and dig into the text and ideas. There were two or three of those meetings if i recall, with five or seven neighborhood representatives. Supervisor cohen maybe perhaps instead of voting no, maybe we could continue this and there could be a little more Due Diligence and outreach given. The reason why i was thinking about this because something you said to commissioners breed question, this would allow city college to fullidy jers the report that you are proposing. I dont know if youre open to that, supervisor yee. Im sorry. What did you say . Trustee. I dont know. Commissioner. Sorry. [laughter] chair peskin used to be a school board member. Never a trustee. Supervisor cohen i know. I was thinking about the new faculty and facility. You could say, hey, trustee cohen commissioner cohen, stop losing your mind over this. The reality this is how things start. This is how change happens. I sat seven years on the land use committee. This is my eighth year. I have seen this before. I know a thing or two. And im certainly not one to prevent growth and development from happening. But its with that wisdom that im asking these questions and i think that its important that one of the things areas that we as City Employees and county employees fall short on is outreach. We dont have a large budget. We have got largely people volunteering their time and theyre coming in and doing this outreach. I just want to make sure we are doing our Due Diligence and pulling in the information so we have a report that has some substance and some thoughtful conclusions. Now mr. Shaw, im in no way saying, commissioner yee, not saying this isnt substantive. There are very few facts in here and there are questions and i would imagine we need more study, which means we need more time. Perhaps we can continue this and give them another month or two to go out and get some feedback . I find it interesting not one person is here speaking in favor of this. Everyone is against this . I would imagine it has to do with outreach. So, colleagues, maybe instead of joining me with a no vote, maybe youll join me with a continuance so that we can get this level of feedback and get it done and get it right. Chair peskin commissioner, is that a motion . Supervisor cohen yes, i would like to make a motion chair peskin im sorry. A motion would take precedence. If shes making a motion and gets a second we would vote on the continuance first and then go to your motion. So, motion by commissioner cohen. Is there a second for that motion . Seconded by commissioner breed on the motion to continue a roll call, please. To what date . Supervisor cohen thank you for asking. Im open to suggestions. Mr. Shaw, do you have any suggestions to what date or commissioner yee how much time do you think . I can go a full week. Chair peskin commissioner cohen. Supervisor cohen perhaps the next meeting . Supervisor yee this item was actually going to be brought to this board more than six months ago. I said lets continue it so we can do further outreach. In many ways ive taken those steps much earlier. So, for me to have continued this long actually, its been more than six months where we asked the staff to go out and do more. And i dont think doing it one more week will change things. As i mentioned, the reason why im okay with this is because i know well i dont know. But according to mr. Shaw, theres going to be other studies being done. And when they do the study, theyre going to take into consideration some of maybe the drawbacks or the issues that have been raised. Which is like, okay, rather than me always saying do more community outreach, they will vote it into their next process. Rather than whats the other thing that he mentioned . Supervisor cohen i mentioned there was no one in support of these. The way the reports works is they work and built off each other. Sounds like when the question was raised what was the outreach, what was the strategy, the answer wufrnt wasnt thorough. It was we had a couple of meetings, maybe five or six. I want to know when was it scheduled, where was it scheduled, signin sheets. Theres ways we capture information. This is how we do it when im doing community meetings. Im able to say heres a document of every single meeting we held. I dont see that. If we could show the screen quickly. Supervisor cohen there it is. Thank you. I think part of the challenge that we discovered part way through the reservoir process and this framework document is that theyre very interrelated prompts, but they are distinct. So, some arguments there are arguments and questions that need to be addressed by the reservoir. We all acknowledge we are not done discussing the reservoir. Absolutely. This framework was not designed to resolve the reservoir challenges. It was meant to be a Strong Foundation so different agencies and particularly city college and the city could begin talking. It was intended to have robust discussion of what tdm is, because it is a pretty technical term. These meetings were at both cacs in the neighborhood. Some focused on the transportation in general. But in some way they all touched on or focused on tdm. And i think well, i acknowledge the comments we have heard today. They are significant and we take them seriously. There are a number of people who support the framework. I dont think it is only opposition in the neighborhood. There were a couple of the cac meetings that are on the slide before you, we went with previous drafts of the document. There were no comments or objections to advancing that document to this body. But at the time, supervisor yee felt like we needed to do more outreach and we agreed and did that. So, i just want to confirm supervisor yees comments that we have done a number of outreach efforts but by no means is it the end and our intent is to focus the outreach on the actionable plans, the things that will have on future Data Collection. The things we can hold folks to through the environmental process. There are plenty of opportunities and our eyes are looking forward to ensuring the outreach and technical requirements for those. Chair peskin thank you, mr. Shaw. Commissioner cohen. Supervisor cohen i would like to withdraw my request to continue this. You want this to go forward. I will support it and vote for it. Chair peskin thank you. That works for the second. Commissioner breed . The motion to continue is withdrawn and on the motion made by commissioner yee, a roll call, please. Clerk on item seven, commissioner breed. Breed aye. Commissioner cohen. Cohen aye. Commissioner fewer. Fewer aye. Commissioner peskin. Chair peskin aye. Clerk commissioner kim. Kim aye. Commissioner ronen. Ronen aye. Safai aye. Commissioner sheehy. Aye. Tang aye. Commissioner yee. Yee aye. We have first approval. Chair peskin all right. Before we read item eight, i want to thank you mr. Hartnet for patience. I have had a request by a commissioner to make ask for a motion to rescind the vote on item number four. Commissioner yee, would you luke to make like to make that motion . Supervisor yee move. Chair