out to the public. this is something we need to consider in the long run. we have to see if it will be for a single-family home with an au pair for keeping some part of commercial rentals. this is up to you. every time you take away a unit, you take away housing. it is a humpty dumpty effect, and rental housing is being lost to throughout the city. i want you to be well aware that this happened. i will read it to you what was said during the first speech -- i have been very concerned about this artificial grass. there's no drainage. if anybody is sick or has an infection, they get cut, another person passes afterwards with a

cut and lands on but space, there's no place to go but inside that wound. and it is not being drained. you could double that she should consider what the long traffic -- ramifications are. -- you should consider what the long-term rabbit -- ramifications are. [bell rings] you can go to the sacred home trust. they have wonderful ways of converting churches to housing. it is one of the finest meetings i ever went to in salt lake city, and it is on the web now. you should see some of the conversions, and also look at holy cross in our city. [bell rings] thank you. commissioner fong: for those of you standing around the door, there are plenty of seats in the room, and you create a fire hazard by doing that. >> good afternoon. my name is paul warmer.

i was coming to you to express a concern or ask for help. this comes from my history in graduate school where i was living in a small unit. it worked because i had a large campus close by. i had in-building services and storage. and i was very close to a park. so it really was possible to live in a very small unit, but that is because of the land use conditions associated with it. my understanding is planning has determined that supervisor wiener's proposal to redefined the efficiency unit in a way that reduces the size and puts an absolute limit of two occupants -- planning said this really does not affect land use and we do not need to consider how this will affect land use. and when i think of all of the ways that living in a small unit requires you to make use of

outside resources, to me, that is a land use impact. i really wish planning would take a look at it and understand what the impacts would be, not only in outside services, but also, how many families in san francisco are now living in, granted, far less than optimal conditions, as single parents with two kids -- are they now going to be restricted with where they can live, even in a large efficiency because this legislation caps it at two? what the impacts of that on social service agency in trying to provide transition housing for homeless, people trying to make it at home but on a limited budget? i think these things need to be looked at. it is not a dbi task to assess that. i believe that is something for the planning department. thank you. >> is there additional general public comment?

>> commissioners, seeing none, we can move on. you're now at your regular calendar that begins with item number 10. case number 2011.1401m. 2012 community safety element. >> good afternoon. planning department staff. we are here to request your approval to amend the community safety element of the general plan. i will provide a very brief overview of the element that the proposed changes since the initiation hearing. following my presentation, a leisure from the department of emergency management will provide an update on the community engagement program under way in her department. as a quick reminder, the element is an important element of the general plan as it sets an overall framework to guide the city's actions in preparation for response to and recovery from a major disaster. the element establishes policies

and programs to protect san francisco from risks associated with natural and man-made disasters. actions and programs will be carried out through a number of other city plans and programs, which we discussed at the initiation hearing on may 17, including the hazard mitigation plan, initiatives, and recommendations developed. we are proposing to update this element for a few reasons. first, the current element was last adopted in 1997. since this time, are thinking around disasters has evolved and we have learned a lot further -- from other cities. and this effort is in close collaboration with other cities to create a framework for community resilience and to establish policies to protect and died at the city's actions for response and recovery from major disaster. and having an updated element inches of this city is well- stated -- well-suited for recovery.

four categories. mitigation, preparing this, response, recovery, reconstruction. and an overview were presented at the initiation hearing. if you have specific -- specific questions, ianswer them. there are very minor changes that have been made since the initiation hearing. and this is to address your comments as well as comments from other agencies. these changes have been incorporated into the draft before you ask exhibita. the changes fall into three categories. first, updated language for programs. second, minor map changes. third, some policy updates. one goal of the updated to incorporate information on current programs dealing with disaster preparedness, recovery, and response. since this document was released, we received comments from other city agencies with more updated information about their programs. we have incorporated that. this includes the earthquakes of the implementation program, which is a next step of capss.

updated the information about the neighborhood emergency response team at known as nert. i apologize for t the typo. we headed the committee engagement program, which is a program of the department of emergency management, and the it to sf, which was created to give an opportunity for individuals and organizations to make donations to a group of city programs, and this includes the san francisco disaster recovery fund. we have added maps 6, which is in the 1997 element. it is making sure that it is in this current draft. and also updating maps two and three with more current data. finally, the policy changes that have been incorporated are to address both yours and agency

comments, including policy 3.4. this includes the vendors for medical and shelter supplies. also, a reference under policy 4.9 to include social media in part of the strategy and reconstruction process. last, we have been asked by the department of emergency management to remove the last paragraph under policy 2.7 as fire suppression and fired reporting are not appropriate activities for the nert team. the department recommends approval of this amendment of the general plan, and i am going to turn the presentation over to alicia johnson, and i am happy to answer questions following her presentation. >> good afternoon. i represent the department of emergency management here in san

francisco. lilly asked me to speak a few moments about our community engagement program. this is essentially how we reach out to the public and to support organizations torepared within d within the bay area as a whole. the department of emergency management work to convene private sector, nonprofit, faith based, and government organizations around the issues that prepare this, mitigation, response, recovery, and resilience. our community engagement program initiates and coordinates that particular mission. the community engagement program includes instigating and participating in community and partner organization events. an example is the randall museum earthquake exhibit that we have partnered with an california academy of sciences and earthquakes. the innovative use of social technologies, particularly our smart phone application, sf

heroes, and working with the building owners and managers organizations, as well as resilience and recovery organizations in the sector. and in coordination with interfaith council as well and some of their biannual activities. we work with the great california shake-out and authorities to help commemorate anniversary events, both for the october 1989 earthquake and the 1906 earthquake that happened in april. those are a few examples of some of the community engagement programs in which we engage. we hope to increase those as the years progress. but it is a newer addition, perhaps a facelift addition to what we have done in the past few years, and we wanted to make sure it was mentioned in the plan itself. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item?

seeing none, commissioners? commissioner miguel: yes, we just finished commenting on one element of the general plan, the housing element. it has a five-year update requirement net, to an extent. other elements are required every 10 years. 15 now in the community safety plan. and i really appreciate the work that has gone into this by the department -- in fact, all of the departments that are involved. and a comment on something --

[inaudible] the housing element has a basic five-year update requirement to an extent. other elements are required every 10 years. 15 now in the community safety plan. i appreciate the work that has gone into this by the department -- in fact, all of the departments involved.

in the cities and of the citizens. yet, we do not have a single other comment on it. i find it absolutely amazing that something as important as this to a city that has had in its history -- we have a possibility of global warming and tide rising and everything else. we have projects planned that have taken these items into consideration, and the public allows the governmental bodies,

including this one, just to do it without any comment. i am disappointment -- disappointed to an extent with the public, but i am pleased they have that kind of confidence in their government. [laughter] commissioner antonini: i did agree how important this is, and it does seem to be extremely well done. anyone who has the ability to read this, which is a public comment, and certainly does so because a lot of events have been taken. there are systems throughout the city which exist even today -- they should be made available in case of emergency if our main water supply is somehow compromised. that is just one of the types of things that the committee said

the element deals with. it is very important, and i encouraged with the way it is being done. >> i want to thank everyone who worked on this. it is very thorough. i thought it was interesting that everything looking at industry -- how that might help us or manage things, to actually calling out a recent development department to treasure island. and the shipyard and focus on making that safe, it is really impressive that so many different issues of been brought together. i highly recommend everyone to read this community safety element. if they're not already prepared to go on to be prepared in the bay area, and make your plans --

to be informed is the key thing. you kept the best laid plans, but if nobody actually knows what to do when a disaster of some sort strikes and you're not connected with fire -- it is pretty humbling to see how we're not prepared when something like that happens, and people are waiting upwards of two and three hours to get to work.

commissioner moore: i would like a glossary of terms, an explanation of actions, and there are no names. the other question is what are we doing on the regional level? what are we doing across the bay region? what are we doing across the state of california, including our communication with those national agencies which are present in the city and they're very active in response for the country as a whole, but as it affects us as a city. i would like to ask those questions as to whether or not

they belong in this document. >> those are great questions that i would like to address. we do not typically about how the document is constructed within the element itself, simply because the element is supposed to be this overarching document that trend isn't the point in time in which it is created. we do not want to undermine any agencies that might change their names are new agencies that might arise over the next 15 years when this might be in place, but we can provide you the information. there is a significant amount of information on all the agencies, the department of emergency management, the city administrator's office, the gsa,

and the other organizations that relate to disaster preparedness and management, how they relate to each other and the roles they play with the city's website. we can kind of incorporate that as well. and your last point about regional cooperation is really important. the city itself is just starting to participate in that. abag has a number of regional plans in terms unpreparedness that they are mandated to include and adopt that are available on their website, and we can provide more information on those. in terms of working together, the collection of jurisdictions within the region, that does happen for some of our emergency management agencies, but i think we're trying to strengthen that. one of the things, if we get out of here in time, we will be attending the task force this afternoon that spur has been

organizing to bring in abag and others to talk about how we can advance a forward in use issues that might be more pressing in terms of recovery and resiliency moving forward. i think it is something we need to do a lot more work on, and we will try to provide information as that effort continues. commissioner moore: i hope you will also raise the general question as to whether or not the 10 to 15 year times are appropriate. there are emergencies and nobody would have ever expected, for example, the moving of a tsunami debris from japan onto our shores. this is just one example. these are uncharted changes in weather patterns and more. i am questioning as to whether or not you might want to raise the cyclical nature of 10 to 15 years being enough. >> very good point. commissioner miguel: a

historical note following commissioner antonini's comment. he mentioned assistance. many of you who have not been in san francisco all your lives and those who are new to it may not have noticed, but if you really are on the lookout, as you come into various locations, intersections of streets around the city, you may note that there is a circle of bricks. it does not seem to designate in a thing. if you do happen to notice it, you're wondering why the strange painting in the street. one of the problems of the1906 disaster was not even as much the earthquake as the fighter. they did not have any water to fight it, because all the water mains went in the earthquake. those are the cisterns that commissioner antonini was commenting upon, and they are,

in effect, water wells under the streets of the city that can be tapped by the fire department. commissioner wu: i want to thank staff for all their hard work on this document. i will ask about the next phase. the document and the recovery and reconstruction session preferences a working group to do the recovery planning. i wanted to ask if there's any kind of timelines set up for that. >> our for step is to adopt the document. we have been working with gsa and the department of emergency management, and once this is completed, that task force will continue to move forward. commissioner wu: thank you. i want to raise one issue which should be part of that working group, which is what happens to the rent-control purchasing stock. commissioner antonini: this is

another item slightly related to the comments of commissioner wu, with new and remodeled housing that we often approved and are careful that they be seismically and functionally safe, and there are provisions as mentioned in this report -- it is very important to incentivize -- i think we can

save ourselves a lot of problems if we are able to address this issue preventive lee. commissioner miguel: i was going to move the adoption of the 2012 community safety element. >> second. commissioner sugaya: none? >> the motion is for approval of the 2012 community safety and up -- element. on that motion -- thank you, commissioners. the motion passed unanimously. commissioners, you're now on item number 11. case number 2012.0522tz. this is an amendment to the

planning code and zoning map to create three new named a neighborhood commercial districts in the city's sunset neighborhood and amend the trade division -- definition in the planning code. >> good afternoon, commissioners. the item before you is an ordinance that was introduced by supervisor carmen chu, the would create three new name that neighborhood commercial districts in the outer sunset. katie is here to speak. i will let her speak. >> good afternoon. i am from supervisor carmen chu's of is that we're introducing legislation to establish named commercial districts in the outer sunset. i apologize. we will be adding a number of pages to your planning code. it will encompass taraval street, noriega st., and we have

23 named neighborhood commercial districts already, such as the inner and outer claimant, castro, broadway. what we want to do in coming up with this legislation, supervisor chu's goal was to figure out a way to helping make our commercial corridors more attractive than vibrant for everyone, residents and visitors alike. we noticed a number of issues which is a lot of vacancies and ground floor uses better not active. this legislation, we wanted to establish a ncd's so we could more uniquely tailor some of the planning controls to district four, specifically, and it would not affect some of the other districts. the other component regarding trade shops, that is city-wide. as for the name commercial districts, what we will be doing is allowing for a five-foot an additional ground floor height. this has been done already and legislation has been passed by the board of supervisors for a number of districts already.

this would help to make the ground floor more attractive. the second thing we do is we are going to be requiring traditional use permit for non- active use is common ground floor uses. third, this is is it what impact that has to do with trade shops. trade shops are already allowed by neighborhood commercial districts. currently, they're allowed to take up one-third of the floor space as long as two-thirds is active retail. this legislation would show that we're not have two-thirds trade shop, meaning light production, the production of artists and crafts and goods. as long as you have a one-third mandatory retail component to it. we have actually reached out to all the district supervisors' offices. have not heard any concerns about that yet. we also will be -- i will run over some of the planning department's recommendations. one is that we want to, number

one, planning department is recommending that we pull out the nc-1 districts. our original intention was to create specific ncd's for taraval, irving, noriega. we want to pull out the nc-1's from this. the other thing is that the planning department is asking that we specifically call out the land use committee. third, we will are in agreement with the planning department to create a separate category for catering to address some of the issues with trucks in the neighborhood. we think a lot of the food production issues are recovered under the recently passed restaurant legislation, as well as specialty grocery.

we will continue to work with the planning department in terms of clarifying the definition for a trade shop. the other thing has to do with mitigation for a boater, vibrations. we already have language regarding sound. what we would like to do is actually mimic some of the language in planning code section703.5, which is operating conditions for eating and drinking venues. with that, i think in the future, district 7 has expressed interest in extending the taraval ncd to supervisor elsbernd's district, and that will require future notification. notification. with that i would be happy to