We'll be right back.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone. This meeting will come to order.

Welcome to the February 2nd, 2026 regular meeting of the Land Use and Transportation Committee of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

I am Supervisor Mirna Melgar, Chair of this Committee, joined by Vice Chair Supervisor Cheyenne Chen and Supervisor Bilal Mahmoud.

The committee clerk today is John Carroll, and I would also like to acknowledge Jeanette

Igleauf from SFGovTV for staffing us in this meeting today.

Mr. Clerk, do you have any announcements?

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.

Please ensure that you've silenced your cell phones and other electronic devices you've

brought with you into the chamber today.

If you have any documents to be included as part of any of today's files, you can submit

them directly to me.

Public comment will be taken on each item on today's agenda.

when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called please line up to speak along

your right hand side of this room alternatively you may submit public comment and writing in

either of the following ways first you can send your comments to me via email at j-o-h-n period

c-a-r-r-o-l-l at s-f-g-o-v.org or you may send your written comments to our office in city hall

and the address is 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, room 244, San Francisco, California 94102.

If you submit public comment in writing, I'll forward your comments to the members of this committee

and also include your comments as part of the official file on which you are commenting.

Items acted upon today are expected to appear on the Board of Supervisors' agenda of February 10, 2026,

unless otherwise stated.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Carroll.

Please call items one and two together.

Agenda item number one is an ordinance amending the planning code to add a new appendix P to article 10,

preservation of historical, architectural, and aesthetic landmarks to create the Chula Abbey Early Residential Historic District.

Agenda item number two is an ordinance to create the Alert Alley Early Residential Historic District.

both ordinances affirm the planning department's secret determination and

make findings of public necessity convenience and welfare under planning

code section 302 and findings of consistency with the general plan and the

eight priority policies of planning code section 101.1 additionally by special

arrangement each of these items appear on our agenda today as potential

committee reports and they may be sent to the Board of Supervisors for

consideration on tomorrow's agenda that's the agenda for February 3rd 2026

Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

We do have Sophie Marie from President Mandelman's office here who will present on this item.

Thank you, Chair Melgar.

Good afternoon, members of the committee.

My name is Sophie Marie, and I'm a legislative aide for the District 8 office.

I'm pinch-hitting today for Supervisor Mandelman, who had hoped to attend but is stuck in meetings all day,

and my colleague who works on this item is out sick, so today you get me.

The items before you today will designate Alert Alley and Chula Abbey Early Residential Historic Districts as Article 10 Landmark Districts.

Our office has worked closely on this legislation with planning staff, the Mission Dolores Neighborhood Association, and neighbors,

and Supervisor Mandelman requests that the committee forward these items to the full board with positive recommendation.

The two historic districts include 50 contributing properties whose unique architectural designs illustrate how the 1906 earthquake and fires impacted the development of the Mission Dolores neighborhood.

The process to designate the Alert Alley and Chula Abbey early residential districts took many years, with lots of door knocking and outreach from the Mission Dolores Neighborhood Association and planning staff.

I want to especially thank Peter Lewis and Aaron Phillips from MDNA and Rich Sucre and Pilar Lavallee from SF Planning for their work on these designations.

With the Chair's permission, I would like to invite Pilar, Senior Preservation Planner for the Planning Department,

to provide the committee with background on these two historic districts and the landmarking designation.

Thank you so much.

Welcome, Ms. Lavallee.

Heavy lift.

Thank you, Sophie.

Good afternoon, Chair Melgar and Supervisors, Pilar LaValley Planning Department staff.

I do have a couple of slides just so we are all getting to look at the lovely resources.

These two landmark districts, Allard Alley and Chula Abbey Early Residential Districts,

were initiated by this board in 2025.

These districts were identified as eligible originally in the Mission Dolores Neighborhood Historic Context Statement and Survey

that was revised an updated version of which was adopted by the Historic Preservation Commission in July 2022.

Centered on Allard Alley and Lander Street between 15th, 16th, and Dolores Streets, the Allard Alley District contains 21 properties.

Allard Hourly District is comprised of residential buildings built in the Italianate classical

revival and Queen Anne architectural styles with a period of significance of 1890 to 1910.

Centered on Chula Lane and Abbey Street and 17th Streets, the Chula Abbey Early Residential

Historic District is comprised of 52 buildings. The Chula Abbey District contains mostly residential

buildings plus two mixed-use buildings, the majority constructed prior to 1906 in folk

Victorian, Italianate, Classic Revival, and Queen Anne styles with a period of significance from 1865

to 1910. At their hearing on October 15, 2025, the Historic Preservation Commission heard public

comments in support of district designations and adopted resolutions recommending designation of

both districts. Per the planning code, the proposed districts were also referred to the

Planning Commission for review and comment, and at their hearing on October 23, 2025,

the Planning Commission adopted resolutions with comments finding that these proposed district

designations were on balance, consistent with the policies embedded in the general plan and

the priority policies of section 101.1. Thank you. That completes my presentation, and I'm here for

any questions. Thank you, Ms. Lavallee. I don't see anyone on the roster with questions or comments

from my colleagues, so let's open up this item for public comment, please, Mr. Clerk.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Land use and transportation will now hear public comment related to agenda

item numbers one and two, this being the landmark district designations for Chula Abbey and

Ellert Abbey. If you have public comment for these two items, please line up to speak along

that western wall I'm pointing out with my left hand and the first speaker can come forward to the

microphone. Please begin. Good afternoon my name is Peter Lewis I was the president of the Mission

Dolores Neighborhood Association for 19 years and when I first started the current version of Mission

Dolores Neighborhood Association in 2005, I put a group of board members together and

engaged the community with the goal of recognizing the neighborhood as the oldest residential

historic neighborhood in the city. And so we worked very, very hard over the years. We got

funding from the Mayor's Office of Economic and Workplace Development,

and engaged the communities.

Many of the community groups that we put together were,

we filled halls in the neighborhood, 50, 100, 150 people.

This has been going on for many, many years.

And so, and people, I run into my neighbors every once in a while,

and they go, hasn't the city already finished the historic districts?

And the fact of the matter is that they haven't, but now we are doing it.

We really appreciate Rafael Mandelman's support and the planning staff and our current members,

and we'd really like you to move it forward.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments.

Do we have anyone else who has public comment for agenda item numbers one and two?

And if we have additional speakers, please line up to speak along that wall over there.

Please begin.

Sure.

Good afternoon.

My name is Aaron Phillips.

I'm the president of the Mission Dolores Neighborhood Association.

Thank you, everyone, for your time today.

Thank you, Pilar, for all your hard work.

I was thinking about what makes San Francisco great, and it's really the geography, the

architecture, and the people.

And we're a peninsula here.

It's a beautiful city with the bay on one side and the ocean on the other.

but also it's the architecture and you can go through all the different aspects of this city

and see amazing architecture that really broad you know brings people to this city you have the

downtown but you also have the mission one of the oldest you know mission dolores neighborhood with

some of the oldest architecture in the state and it's beautiful and then we have tourists come all

the time to the area to see the the mission dolores church but also the structures the

surrounding structures around it are incredibly important because they help people to understand

the history and the character of that part of the city. So I hope that we will continue to push this

forward and preserve the nature and architecture of this area for future generations. So thank you

again and thank you very much, Pilar. Thank you for your comments. Do we have any further speakers

for agenda item numbers one and two madam chair okay public comment on this

item is now closed I would like to make a motion to send these items out of

committee to the full board with a positive recommendation mr. clerk please

call the roll madam chair were you gonna send these as a committee report oh I'm

sorry as a committee report as his agenda yes on the motion offered by the

the chair that both of these ordinances be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors

with the recommendation of land use and transportation as a committee report.

Vice Chair Chen. Chen, aye. Member Mahmood. Mahmood, aye. Chair Melgar. Aye. Melgar, aye.

Madam Chair, there are three ayes. Thank you so much. That motion passes.

Thank you, Ms. Lavallee and Sophie Marie. Okay, please call item number three.

agenda item number three is an ordinance ordering the summary street vacation of city property on

unimproved street areas of moraga and noriega avenues finding the street vacation area is not

necessary for the city's use reserving easements related to support for the city-owned retaining

wall from the street vacation properties and including other conditions to the street vacation

amending the planning code and zoning map to rezone the city property from public open space

to RH240X and to rezone parcels on Kensington Way adjacent to Vasquez Avenue from RH1 slash 40X

to public open space, affirming the secret determination and making findings of consistency

with the general plan and the eight priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1

and adopting findings of public necessity, convenience, and welfare under Planning Code

Section 302. Thank you so much, Mr. Clerk. Colleagues, I wanted to provide a

little bit of background on this item since it is in District 7. It has been a long process and

part of an even longer process way before I became a supervisor. So this, we are doing a swap of land

between privately owned land and land that is currently owned by the city and county of San

Francisco. This is a subsequent story, a story that started many years ago on Kensington Way.

Itch Hill Mountain is the hill that is on the other side of Bertola from Mount Davidson,

and it is made out of something called Franciscan church. It's an unstable rock

that has had a very long history of landslides.

The particular, the city has acquired these parcels before

from private entities and added it to the open space

at Edge Hill Park, which is currently owned

mostly by the Rec and Parks Department,

although there is some ownership from DPW as well.

The particular exchange before us today

started with Supervisor Yee.

The neighbors around Nitch Hill Park were concerned with potential development of five lots that would have required digging into the hill and potential for landslide.

And I, upon taking office, went to the Department of Real Estate and went about the process of identifying comparable land that was owned by the city that we could swap to allow the owner to develop housing,

which we desperately need and still protect the health and safety of the community.

The laws around land swaps have dramatically changed since the first swaps were done many years ago.

It is much more difficult to do it today because of state law and the complexity of the legal landscape.

nevertheless we were able to find a the area of land that could be swapped within district seven

that is comparable also on a hill but not presenting a health and safety issue

and we went through getting the plan vetted by the state housing HCD,

Housing Community Development,

and also the process with our departments and our city attorney.

So we are now at the end of this process,

a former committee of the Land Use and Transportation Committee

and former Board of Supervisors initiated the legislation that we have before us today.

We are rezoning the parcels that are going from open space in RH1 and RH2 to allow for the swap to take place.

So I do have some amendments to the legislation that is in front of you, and that has been shared with you.

and that is a clarification and in addition in line nine we are adding the words and RH2

residential housing to family and then adding the words and assessor's parcel block number 2042

comma lot number 40 from RH1 residential housing one family and RH2 slash OS to RH2 slash 40X

in lines 9 and 10. And then adding words, residential housing, one family detached dwelling

in lines 13 and 14. And there's also changes to the table in the descriptions on page 9.

Lastly, we do have some amendments that do not need re-referral to the Planning Commission

and are non-substantive that would give us some time to work out some departmental jurisdictional

issues that we will work out before any potential escrow closes on pages 6, line 7, 8, 11, 16,

and 17.

And now I would like to bring up Audrey Merloni from the Planning Department who can describe

that process.

Welcome, Ms. Merloni.

Thank you, Chair Melgar.

Hello, members of the committee.

Audrey Merloni, Planning Department staff.

The Planning Commission heard this item on October 9th of 2025 and voted to approve the ordinance.

Since that time, the department has worked with the supervisor's office and the city attorney on the clarifying amendments,

so we would ask for your support today on those as well.

And as always, I'm available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Merloni.

I did present at the Planning Commission, colleagues, and it was a unanimous vote at the Planning Commission.

So if there are no questions or concerns from my colleagues, let's open this item up for public comment.

Mr. Clark.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Land use and transportation will now hear public comment related to agenda item number three,

planning code, zoning map, street vacation for portions of Moraga, Noriega Avenues, and Kensington Way.

If you have public comment for this item, please line up to speak along that wall.

I'm pointing out with my left hand, and the first speaker who was at the lectern already can begin.

Good afternoon. My name is Helene St. John. I reside at 217 Kensington Way.

I have with me the organizations who have joined CARE, the Community's Action to Rescue Edge Hill.

Along with these organizations, I have several letters.

And in addition to that, I have a list of the San Francisco residents who signed CARE's petition

opposing the proposed development at 146 through 166 Kensington Way in favor of open space.

I also have newspapers here that will detail the history of Edshell.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon.

at Chairperson, Melgar, and committee members.

My name's Laura Straso.

I'm an attorney with Patterson and O'Neill,

and I represent Kensington Way LLC.

I just wanted to introduce myself and say I'm here

if you have any questions,

and obviously we support the land swap.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker, please.

I'm Elizabeth Mayer, speaking for CARE.

We convened in 2019 when the plans came out to develop these lots,

and we were worried right away because of the long history of slope failure

with digging into these steep sections of Edge Hill.

We've had geologists out who explain that when water flow in the hillside

is altered by excavation, layers of shale disintegrate faster than surrounding rock,

which can cause large sections of the hill to abruptly collapse.

and here they would be excavating 30 horizontal feet in some areas where the slope is almost vertical.

We have landslides recorded for 74 years on Edge Hill in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s.

I won't go into it too much, all the history,

but the last excavation along Kensington in 98 was really disastrous with a landslide

and I think five years' delays.

So the history is also on our website in linked articles.

It's rescuethehill.org.

So the neighborhood's been working for 50 years

to stop development on these steep sections,

and that's how we got the Edge Hill Mountain open space,

Supervisor Melgar referred to.

It's just uphill from these lots.

And we've had really strong community support

for keeping them open space.

We had 200 people.

Oh, that's it.

30 seconds.

30 seconds.

Oh, 200 people came to planning for the initial public hearing.

233 signed our petition, 29 neighborhood groups.

And bottom line is we believe Supervisor Melgar's solution

furthers the city's goals of more safely buildable housing

and preserving open space.

it would allow for denser housing to be built adjacent to current homes rather than less dense housing.

Speaker's time is concluded. Thank you so much for your comments.

On a Forsted Hill. Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon, committee members. My name is George Burwasser.

I am a California registered geologist, license number 7151.

Oh, my home address is 2341 Bush Street in San Francisco.

I've been, I apologize for the voice.

I've been professionally involved in slope stability studies on Edge Hill Mountain off and on since the 1990s.

And today I wanted to touch on a few of the underlying issues contributing to the slope destabilization along the flanks of this mountain.

that Dr. Mayer has just told you about.

Edge Hill Mountain is composed primarily of interbedded chert and shale and massive sandstone.

This sounds like it should be a pretty solid bedrock,

but in actuality it's a rather fragile combination,

especially when it's disturbed by any form of excavation, quarrying, road building, foundation construction.

Much of the chert and shale is layered in beds a few inches to a few feet thick.

The chert is hard but brittle, and it's compressed.

It's crumpled into a series of very picturesque folds.

The chert is moderately strong to strong.

It's closely fractured, which is an important point.

The interbedded shale generally is soft and moderately hard.

Oh, that was quick.

Thirty seconds.

I'm going to skip all the rest of the technical stuff then.

Regardless of the internal strength of the Churton sandstone on this hillside,

when it's interbedded with these soft shales,

any form of disturbance will cause it to fail.

Quarrying has introduced more water into the system.

Retaining walls have kept water in the system.

It's added weight.

It's added fluctu...

Thank you for your comments.

The speaker's time is concluded.

Thank you.

Let's have the next speaker, please.

Two minutes.

Folks, when you hear the first soft chime, that means you have 30 seconds.

You should wrap it up, and it's two minutes per speaker.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman Melgar, members of the committee.

I have a statement that I prepared.

I'd like to have it in the record, if I may.

Just put it right there on the railing with the rest, and we will get to the committee.

But if you do, okay, you started the clock.

I'll go fast.

I live about three houses away from the portion of Moragas Creek that is proposed to be vacated.

I'm a retired tax lawyer and I have a problem with the structure of the transaction and

not with the relief to be afforded to Edge Hill.

The transaction is structured as a like-kind exchange, property for property, no cash or

money changing hands.

Who benefits from that?

Why not just sell the land that the city has to the highest bidder, use the money to buy

the Kensington land?

And the answer is that doing it as an exchange avoids tax on about $3.5 million of gain for Kensington, no benefit to the city there.

So I look at the transaction as a citizen.

How do we know it's fair to the city if there's no open market transaction and no bidding?

The answer is the appraisal requirements.

You must exchange land for 100% of its value, appraised value, or explain why not.

And what's the appraisal problem?

The board's earlier resolution and the appraisal said that the part of Moraga to be vacated

was 30 feet by 100 feet.

That changed with no additional appraisal.

Thank you for your comments.

The speaker's time has concluded.

Thank you.

Thank you.

In July 2025.

Let's have the next speaker, please.

Hello.

My name is Laura Swaminathan,

a resident at 98 Rockaway Avenue

within Edge Hill Slope.

I'm also a homeowner of 63 Garcia Avenue and have personally been through the four-year arduous process of taking building plans through the structural advisory committee, which is required to get anything built on Edge Hill Slope, whereby we pay, I think, four or five engineers to cross-peer review one another in front of the city.

It's very arduous and expensive.

It cost us about $500,000 to get through to the building permit alone in four years.

It's understandably going to be cheaper for the Kensington Way LLC to build on this swapped land,

but my concerns do align with that of the previous speaker, that currently we have 10 buildable lots.

The idea that it's dangerous to build on Kensington Way has not been subject to the Structural Advisory Committee.

Every engineer we spoke to on our process said that building engineered foundation walls with proper drainage

actually stabilizes the slope it does not destabilize the slope there have been rock

fall and tree fall onto Kensington Way that the city is responsible for liability wise as well

as cleaning and maintenance this can be prevented by allowing the current private property owners to

develop the land as it was intended through the structural advisory committee review process second

right now it so we have ten buildable lots it's going to be reduced to five that's contrary to

to the city's housing goals.

We're giving up essentially $5 million in equity

and potentially $250,000 of annual property tax revenue

if these five houses get built as designed.

So again, my concerns somewhat align with the previous speaker

that just as a taxpayer, it's a lot of money to give away

to protect five people's views

and to protect the developer's construction cost.

I hope the city considers that

and that the supervisors respect their fiduciary duty to the citizens and taxpayers.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon.

My name is Frank Chen.

I have property on 1800 and 1802 8th Avenue, right on the corner of Noriega Avenue.

It was built in 1997, right after the 1989 earthquake.

It has a bedroom and kitchen windows on three levels adjacent to where the paper sidewalk would have been built.

The plans were approved prior to 1997, where I have the bedroom and kitchen windows.

The same was true of the previous building, which was ultimately demolished after that Loma Prieta earthquake.

When a new owner takes over the vacant lot and takes possession of it, will the non-existent sidewalk-allocated space still exist?

When the new owner builds, will they honor the sidewalk space?

I have three levels of windows, which are necessary to maintain the definition of a bedroom.

and would like confirmation that these existing windows will still be allowed

and whether I will have light in those bedrooms will you honor my rights the

other issue I have a concern about is the city is the issue of plugging up or

abandoning one of the storm water storm sewers and it's adjacent to the

retaining wall and is in the very corner of my property at the very bottom of it

toward Laguna Honda or 7th Avenue. I've attached pictures of the sewer and the

sewer is at the low point of several neighbors property from up the hill.

1804, 1806, 1808, 1810, 8th Avenue, etc. My concern is that the sewage will stay on

my property with nowhere to flow, thus creating a health and safety hazard. So

consideration to address my rights and concerns are appreciated when the city vacates its rights

for the land swap. And I apologize for seeming selfish and self-centered. I've heard all their

comments as well. Thank you for your comments. Let's have the next speaker, please.

Hi, my name is Glenn Gullmus. I published the West Portal monthly newspaper for 25 years.

My publishing company, San Francisco Times, is a founding member of the San Francisco

Neighborhood Newspaper Association. I've lived on Kensington for 40 years. I come from two

generations of homeowners and builders in the city. And what we're looking at here is a potential

ecological disaster. If they were to excavate into the hill, it's a recipe for disaster

as soon as you add water. I've seen this time and time again. Every single time there's been

large development on Edge Hill.

There's been massive landslides.

There was a 100-ton landslide that dumped rock

up to the second floor of Knockash Hill neighbors.

They were closed for months.

It resulted in the demolition of an octagonal house

atop Edge Hill Way.

This solution that Supervisor Melgar has come up with

is beneficial on many levels.

It preserves habitat.

It prevents landslides.

And it protects families.

It's one of those things where I know a previous speaker characterized it

as saving the views of five people.

You have not been around long enough to see what I have seen.

The damage that has been done from excavation on Edge Hill can be catastrophic.

And I support this land swap going under DPW's jurisdiction with Carla Short,

whose background in urban forestry will help protect the area.

And I believe this is a solution that's been a long time coming

since I toured the area with Assemblymember Jackie Speier,

since Supervisor Tony Hall engineered the original land swaps that opened space on Edge Hill.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments.

Let's have the next speaker, please.

My name is Huntley Barad.

I'm a homeowner on Kensington Way.

I want to just say it seems to me that after all these years of investigation

and negotiations and public meetings,

that everybody's deal and everybody's feelings

have been taken into account and tried to make this a fair deal.

Nobody's gone to the developer and tried to take something away.

Nobody is trying to, you know, muscle in

and push it one way or another.

They're taking everybody's feelings and needs

and economic concerns into the pot

to decide what can be done.

We're trying to protect our street, and we want a fair deal for everybody.

I don't really understand the tax consequences, as the other gentlemen spoke about,

but I'm sure that they've been taken into consideration.

And Supervisor Melgar has done such a great job that I'm sure that she totally understands

how this can impact the fiscal health of the city

and would not put together a bad deal for the city.

That's my two cents.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon.

I'm Greg King.

I'm a member of the board for the Edge Hill Ways Neighborhood Association.

We have several board members here today and other neighbors supporting this move, too.

And we'd like to thank our supervisor for coming up with a very good plan

for addressing what would have been a big problem in the future.

It's not just about views.

It's not just about people protecting their neighborhood

and at the expense of others.

It's because of safety issues

and concerns about how that development would have been done.

I've lived on Edge Hill now for going to my 26th year now,

and we were actually involved with the very first land swap as well too.

And I know it's a difficult situation as people look at these things,

but I'm convinced that the city has done their job

to make sure that this swap is reasonable and fair in the process they're doing,

and it's the best way to address this.

So you have our neighborhood's full-throated support of this activity,

and we appreciate the efforts the city has made on our behalf.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker, please.

I'm Dan Chelsky.

I'm also on the Edge Hill Way Association board.

I just want you really to support my neighbors.

I want to support the comments that Greg King just made.

We want to thank Supervisor Melgar for helping to come up with an equitable trade, swap, land swap, to accommodate the situation.

I want to confirm that, yes, this hill is very steep.

It is not just unstable, but it's extremely steep, and so it just makes it very susceptible to a possibility of landslides.

I also want to point out one more thing that I haven't heard is that Kensington, which I use frequently, is basically a one-lane road.

To get by cars coming up the hill, you quite often have to go up on the sidewalk.

The thought of having multiple years of construction on that street would be quite the nightmare for not just the residents, but also anyone planning to use that street.

So I think that the plan that has been identified here is a sensible one

and will really resolve a major issue.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon.

My name is Gordon Atkinson.

I'm the vice president of the Edge Hillway Association.

I'm an architect.

I have a private practice in San Francisco.

I've been a resident of Edge Hill Way for 30 years.

I have reviewed the plans submitted for the proposed development of the Kensington Way properties.

And apart from the other concerns already voiced, I want to reinforce what you may already be aware of,

is the access to the public right-of-way from the proposed lots.

As far as I know, the entrance and vehicular entrance

to the proposed development residences has not been addressed.

there would have to be significant public infrastructure changes

in order to bring the driveway access into compliance

with the subdivision code and the Caltrans standards.

a steep slope, and there's an embankment there.

And as Greg mentioned, or Dan mentioned, it's like a one-way street.

There's a very convoluted intersection that is already out of compliance with Caltrans standards.

And it's difficult to navigate and understand the traffic signals as is.

and I, as an architect, I can't even imagine how they could arrange entrance.

The speaker's time is concluded.

Thank you for sharing your comments.

Let's hear from the next speaker.

The public way from the driveway.

Thank you so much.

Let's have the next speaker, please.

And if we have anyone else who has public comment for agenda item number three,

please line up to speak along that side of the room.

Otherwise, this will be our last speaker.

Hello, I'm Nicole St. John.

I reside at 217 Kensington Way.

I'd like to say first that any trees and rocks that have fallen on Kensington

have happened only after they've dug a test pit to test the Franciscan church.

It's only after digging into Edge Hill that there's anything that falls onto the street or sidewalk.

In addition, I'd like to say that prior public comments mentioned lost tax revenue.

the developer will build suitable housing where it is safe for all residents and if these speakers

are concerned about potential tax revenue what is the cost to fixing a disaster with a massive

landslide caused by a massive landslide thank you thank you for your comments do we have any

further speakers for agenda item number three madam chair okay thank you public comment is now

closed. Thank you colleagues for hearing this item. Thank you to all the members of the community

who came out for public comment. I wanted to address just a couple of the things that were

for my colleagues. As I had stated during my opening remarks, this has been a years-long

process, we had not one but two appraisals actually done on both the original property

on Kensington and the one that we're swapping. In accordance to state law, we did offer the

land that the city currently owns as a paper street to non-profit developers for affordable

housing development twice, actually, because state law changed in the middle of our process,

and there were no takers. They're very small lots, and it doesn't support a lot.

And this action that we're taking today is only about the swap. It is not a development approval.

The developer or the owner of the swap lots will have to do everything himself from scratch,

including any easements and any issues around sewer or access to public improvements like the retaining wall.

And also, I just wanted to make sure that we understood that in the legislation that we are proving today,

we are not changing anything that has to do with setbacks from the neighboring properties.

the zoning remains and the bulk height remains as is.

So with that, I don't know if there's any questions or comments from my colleagues.

I don't see any.

And if that is the case, I would like to make a motion that we amend the legislation that's before us,

as I read into the record,

and then that we send it out with a positive recommendation as amended to the full board.

According to motions, both offered by the chair, the first to amend the ordinance

and the second to recommend the ordinance as amended to the Board of Supervisors.

On those motions, Vice Chair Chen?

Chen, aye.

Member Mahmood?

Mahmood, aye.

Chair Malgar?

Aye.

Malgar, aye.

Madam Chair, there are three ayes on each of those motions.

Thank you.

That motion passes.

Thank you.

Mr. Clerk, are there any other items on our agenda today?

There's no further business.

We are adjourned.

Thank you.

We'll be right back.