Good morning, today is wednesday , september 18th, 2019. This is a regular meeting of the abatement appeals board. I would like to remind everyone to turn of all electronic devices. The first item on the agenda is roll call. [roll call] we have a quorum. The next item is item be. The oath where are part all parties giving testimony please raise your right hand and stand. Do you swear the testimony were about to give is a truth to the best of your knowledge . Thank you, you maybe seated. For information his, we want to state the department will present its case first then the appellant. Each individual has seven minutes to present their case. Next there will be Public Comment. The members have three minutes each. Lastly there is rebuttal time of three minutes. The next item is item see, approval of minutes great discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for the meeting held on august 21st, 2019. Move to approve. We have a motion and a second is there any Public Comment on the
Good morning, everyone. The meeting will come to order. Welcome to the september 30th, 2019, meeting of the rules committee. Im supervisor hillary ronen, chair of the committee. Seated to my right is rules Committee Vice chair Shamann Walton and seated to my left is rules Committee Member supervisor gordon mar. We are joined by supervisor aaron peskin. Our clerk is linda wong, filling in for victor young. And id also like to thank jesse larson and Kalina Mendoza at sfgov for staffing this meeting. Ms. Clerk, do you have announcements . Clerk please make sure to silence cell phones. Complete the speaker cards and documents are included should be submitted to the clerk. Acts acted on today, will be appear on the board of supervisors agenda on october 8th. Thank you. Clerk item number one. An ordinance amending the administrative code to add a preference in City Affordable Housing programs to tenants temporarily evicted from rental units for Capital Improvements or rehabilitation work. An
The most troubling. Thats where im having the biggest trouble and thats the project and preservation alternative. Well be up against a lot of projects on south market. We have the opportunity to figure out how to design vertical additions over Historic Buildings and how our city thinks these should be what the glanc guidance provided to o that. I dont think the guideline guis design but conceptual framework. Thats what our policy on retained elements is trying to address and these are ones we can learn from and test different approaches. Commissioner so . I actually agree with all of my fellow commissioners have put forward, their point. Commissioner perlman mentioned the partial preservation part and wear looking at what is required for this commission. But then Commission High listen had a good point about i do agree when were looking at characterdefining feature, it the embodiment of the contextual responsiveness to the neighborhood and culture and community. So with the gentrificat
Year. But that is their jurisdiction. So i defer to them on their study and what theyre looking at for charging on the curb and what else they want to do for the curb and theyre going to report back later after that assessment is done on that topic. Supervisor peskin thank you. I see a number of members of the public. And commissioner here. We will open up for Public Comment. Please come up. I believe it is good policy. One key thing i want to hammer home is question of equity, which supervisor safai talked on all three points. Equity in terms of cost, in terms of usage and finally, geography, because the map is beneficial to the northeast section of San Francisco. Hopefully, well be able to build out e. V. Infrastructure to support the west side, meaning the Richmond District and sunset or low density. And the cars have created a cardriven culture, so hopefully curbside charging can address this. For bright line itself, weve worked in bayview hunters, so seeing the lack of charging in
Item number 1 is ordinance amending the planning code to designate 2031 bush street, aka Kinmon Gakuen building, as a landmark under article 10 and affirming appropriate findings. Supervisor peskin thank you, ms. Major. Before we introduce Shannon Ferguson from the Planning Department, i would like to be listed as cosponsor of this landmark designation. The case report was really a pleasure to read and very well done. And very edifying and of course, speaks to terrible parts of our American History and San Francisco history relative, not only to executive order 9066, but acts of local governments, including our school board in the day. Its almost the opposite of todays dynamics where we have a racist, xenophobic president and a very Progressive School board. In those days, actually, Teddy Roosevelt i learned from the case report, was the one accusing, and correctly so, our school board of being in those days, xenophobic. And racist. The history of the building is amazing from 1926 and