>> before i take role, i would like to remind all of us to turn off our cell phones or any other electronic device. commissioner katharine more? ore -- kathrin moore? we have a full commission today. commissioners items on calendar art items #one and two -- are items 1 and 2.

floor area ratio, parking come in compliance in specified use districts. item two is case number 2,011.0533z. special district porcine elimination and special districts for phoenix street. staff? >> supervisors choose offi chi'e will make comments before i begin my presentation. nice to see all of you here. i know you a very long day ahead of you. i want to make very clear what the request is in regards to

this item. since we met in october, we have had a number of meetings with interested parties. not all of the meetings we would like to have, and the meetings we did have were a midpoint of discussion on particular items, everything from affordable housing for the exemptions on area ratio for affordable housing to rooftop screening to some of the limited commercial uses and robust discussions on the parking issues we discussed in october. given what we believe is the fact that there is more art reached needed and we want to do more outreach, after the discussion today and public comment, we would respectfully request that you continue this item one more time. i am open to late january/early february. and late february may be more realistic. i know we have a busy year coming up. i want to thank the commission for all the time you have spent so far on this legislation, and

your staff. in general we really appreciate the effort the commission staff went through to make my reject recommendations. we are very close to being prepared to except all of them. i-- in general, we really appreciate the effort the commission staff went through to make recommendations. we want to have one more policy discussion with the port about the goals that are in the legislation to make sure we are on the same page in working toward some of those goals. i can respond to specific questions after your staff presentation or if anything comes up during public comment that you would like me to respond to. generally that is where we are. we appreciate your time. we hope you get a little time before your want afternoon meeting starts. thank you very much.

-- your loner afternoon ger afternoon meeting starts. >> good morning, commissioners. i have placed the presentation in front of you, and i also put an amendment to the recommendation. one is a clerical modification that was supposed to be in the original report, and we accept the left it out. the second one clarify is a code section, and i've highlighted them on there. i will be happy to answer questions about those. i was going to put together a musical number for this, but scott sanchez would not do it with me, so it just out of power point presentation. no video. i organize the recommendations into six different categories.

clerical, parking, clarifications, lcu and other. the recommendations will not follow that actual order in the executive summary, but i will slow -- cite the numbers you can follow along. the first one i will not go under half -- over each clerical modification but there are things we found in the legislation were there were incorrect references. that is what those are. the next section for parking, the ordinance makes a lot of changes to parking, and these are the proposed recommendations for that.

recommendation one in the executive summary, the proposed ordinance prohibits parking lot in the zoning district, which makes all existing non- conforming uses, which means they would have to cease operations within five years. we're recommending surface parking lots be allowed under conditional use. this would allow existing surface parking lots to operate, and it would allow the commission to grant new parking lots or expansion on a case by case basis. recommendation no. 2 in the executive summary, the proposed ordinance expand powers to waive certain requirements, for jerkily to parking.

the parking -- department recommends parking for st. 161 here yen this is one of the changes made that i highlighted. this recommended change would allow -- would result in allowing administrative exceptions to off-street parking requirements in all districts. recommendation no. 3 in the executive summary, the proposed ordinance removes the code that allows proposed parking lots, which are currently non- conforming units. we are recommending modifying the code so these will require renewal s kemper uses a conditional use every five years, instead of every two years. parking lots would still be non-

conforming uses, and would be required to end operations in five years it operators did not seek it to be a temporary use. it would permit existing parking lots to continue to operate for a reasonable amount of time. while allowing the commission to review temporary use request on a case by case basis. recommendation # four, the proposed ordinance changes the minimum parking under proposed unit. we are recommending to remove the off-street parking units for off-street districts and continue to regulate the parking maximum requirements by the more permissive excess report a controls. by adding this to the proposed legislation, districts will be treated like all other mixed-use districts in the city.

skipping to recommendation no. 7, the proposed ordinance rewrite the long-term parking rate structure based on a proposal by the metropolitan transportation administration. the department recommends having a long-term parking rate structure in the transportation. we are asking you to recommend that to the board of supervisors. the temporary measure, we would like it to be put in the code that the planning director could authorize the director of transportation to enforce the section of the code. this is extremely difficult for the department to enforce. having it in the planning code means it cannot be retroactive. if a new parking crunch comes into existence, it would be subject to new controls. recommendation no. 16.

the proposed ordinance make several changes to parks and maximum controls. this could create problems with projects that have already been approved by the commission and projects that are in the process of getting funding and getting prepared to be built. the department is recommending we had a grandfathering clause to the ordinance that would exempt those projects, projects that have already gone conditional use from you. the next section seeks to clarify certain provisions in the ordinance. there are just two of those. recommendation no. 10 remind -- deals with section 184. these parking lots are non-

conforming uses currently. we want to make sure that they do not have to go out of business immediately, which is the way some have read the legislation, so i am seeking language into the ordinance that would make it clear they would have to cease operation within five years and 90 days. recommendation no. 14, the proposed ordinance exempts affordable housing from f.a.r. limits. there was also concerned this would exempt all units in the building if there were affordable units present. we are seeking clarification that in the ordinance but says only affordable housing units are exempt. the next section is lccu's ltd.

commercial uses and ltd. cornered commercial uses. section 8 in the executive summary deals with this. the proposed ordinance would a allowlccu' lccu's to be 2,500 f currently the limit is 1200 square feet and 50 feet from the corner. the department recommends maintaining existing controls as they are. we generally recommend that idea is this the thing to community planning efforts be continued to the five-year post plan adoption time. this is something that the octavia group has requested to be changed in the ordinance as well.

recommendation no. 17, a proposed ordinance allows lcu's to be established with conditional use. we think this is a great idea, but it specifies that it cannot be done if the space has been converted into our residential unit. and many of these spaces are awkward as residential units. they were designed as corner stores and do not work well as residential units, so we would like that to be stricken from the ordinance and allow these to be reinstated on a case by case basis. the following recommendations deal with port property in the recommendations that we worked out with the department and the port. the first one is recommendation 5a that deals with the waterfront design advisory committee, and we would like to expand the authority of w.a.c.

still has jurisdiction over all port properties. we think it is a good process for the port property and how things get developed. it makes sense to continue it all the way since there will be this altmandesolvements. we also ask this be moved from section 240, which is the waterfront s.u.d. to article 3 that deals with general processes. recommendation fiv5b, currently the planning commission appoints one member of staff. the planning department of lowry's -- allows both departments to appoint a staff member or person outside the agency staff with qualified expertise in urban design or planning or a landscape design

and architecture. recommendation # 5c, the proposal strikes out language that was thought to be redundant. it exempts port property from existing -- existing port property from conditional use. the port feels this reaffirms their obligations under the burton act. keeping it or striking it does not do anything for us. we're fine with keeping it in there. recommendation of 5d, of the proposed legislation would require a new waterside curb cut. the department recommends that the ordinance be altered so that waterside curb cuts, including newki curb cuts should be approved through w.a.c.

finally, recommendation no. two in the zoning law change. this is the only one i will go over on that. the proposed ordinance moves three blocks. we recommend striking this from that legislation. it does not require any substantial changes, but the ports feel it would unnecessarily complicate understanding of how waterfront design process relates to pour properties. -- port properties. in the other category -- i could have come up with something more interesting. the proposed ordinance prohibits commercial vehicles in the commercial district. we think this is compatible use for the c.m