cannot be used as a residential unit because people will be looking in your front window. this would allow the reactivation of those spaces, as well as slightly larger commercial spaces, but only in the rm districts. we decided to wait for the rto district of a larger rm districts, you will allow those larger commercial spaces. supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker. we're going to close public comment in a moment. >> ♪ get your motor running head out of the great highway fire all of your guns at once and explode into parking space like a true natures child you were born to the -- born

to be wild born to be wild did your motor running city going to make it happen by year your guns at once and explode into parking by good -- bicycle space born to be wild and i am running on empty running blind running blind it into the city sun and want some parking to find it running on empty running blind running blind and i want the parking, to and i do not even know what i'm looking sometimes to find i don't even know what i am looking to the city to find ♪ supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker.

>> thank you very much. we have been waiting for a long time to reach this point with this legislation. and i will urge the committee to please move ahead with what the chair wants to do as soon as possible. a lot of businesses are depending on this for this such rigid, and i urge the city to pass the motions. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you, thank you, sir. anyone else that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, i wanted to add my name to items 3 and 5. if there is no objection, can we move all these items forward as the committee report with a positive recommendation for consideration on july 24, 2012

board meeting? without objection, thank you. thank you. could you please call item number 6? >> item number six, ordinance amending the planning code to create a new definition of student housing to permit the conversion of student housing to residential units and prohibit the conversion of residential units to student housing. supervisor mar: supervisor winner is the sponsor. -- supervisor wiener is the sponsor. supervisor wiener: thank you, mr. chairman. this legislation, which has gone through very, very extensive process -- several trips back and forth between the land use committee and the planning commission as well as the various stakeholders involvements. this legislation will help us to achieve a goal of creating new student housing without

cannibalizing existing and scarce residential housing stock. the legislation provides the definition of student housing for the first time that is applicable throughout the planning code. the clear definition of student housing is part of an effort to address the shortage of student housing available in san francisco, a need that was brought to the attention of the planning department and the board of supervisors by housing experts, post-secondary educational institutions, and developers. the goal of the legislation is to address the need for student housing in a manner that acknowledges and protect our existing housing stock. in other words, student housing is not the only kind of housing for which there is a severe shortage in san francisco. we have the housing affordability crisis in part because of an imbalance in supply and demand. there's an estimated shortage of as many as 50,000 state and beds in san francisco. this legislation is intended, first and foremost, to encourage

the production of new student housing through incentives. student housing is already exempt, as of a few years ago from inclusion airing housing fees and requirements under certain circumstances. this legislation that we have today before us would also exempt student housing from unit mix requirements in specific eastern neighborhood areas for specific neighborhoods within the eastern neighborhoods zone of the city. it would also reduce the open space requirement to parallel the requirements for single resident occupancy buildings. the goal of the legislation will encourage and incentivize the construction of new student housing. to do this, the legislation would prohibit the conversion of existing housing to student housing. conversely, there is a straightforward task to convert student housing back to regular housing through a review by the

zoning administrator, with inclusionary fees that are due. after drafting this initial legislation which came out of the planning department, i worked with a variety of existing, respected post- secondary institutions to ensure that the legislation would maximize the availability of student housing. the planning commission considered the amendment to address the identified needs and approved them unanimously. these amendments include several things that were incorporated in the substitute legislation that i recently introduced. additionally, we have included amendments as drafted by the mayor's office of housing and the housing action coalition that speaks specifically to contractual arrangements between the property owners and the post-secondary educational facilities to make sure to clarify those relationships and

to make sure that we're not unwittingly does incentivizing student housing creation. we want to be sure that the mayor's office of housing, who will be regulating these, is equipped to ensure the projects are being used for housing. colleagues, this legislation has broad support. it addresses a longstanding -- two longstanding needs of incentivizing the creation of student housing and avoiding the cannibalization of our existing housing stock. the legislation to achieve a good balance, and i ask for your support. if -- are there any introductory remarks? ok, then perhaps the planning department can provide an overview of the legislation. >> quickly, and leroy rogers from the planning department staff. i would like to convey the planning department's gratitude

to supervisor wiener. the commission did acknowledge the shortage of student housing as discussed by the supervisor. the ordinance before this body creates significant incidents to turn the tide and encourage the production of new student housing. this is a vital step. without such action today, the housing of our most vulnerable populations would have been at risk. instead, the ordinance establishes controls for a variety of student housing types throughout the city in a manner compatible with neighborhoods. the commission urges the board to adopt this ordinance that is before you today. i believe the supervisor dave very thorough summary of the ordinance. but if there any questions, i would be happy to provide clarification. supervisor wiener: thank you very much. colleagues, questions? hearing none, i guess we will go to public comment. supervisor mar: i do not see any cards.

supervisor wiener: if there is anyone who would like to make public comment, please step forward. you'll have two minutes. >> hello, i am here today as a trustee of the art institute. it is a very small and historic school. our ability to maintain our existing housing is imperative, and our ability to create a student environment and community. with that, we have been able, with housing, to have great success in our state and retention and financial stability. so thank you so much, supervisor wiener and all of you, for looking at the art institute in who we are. thank you for including us in your thoughts. supervisor wiener: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i live in the university terrace section of town. i want to thank you for changing the word "adjacent" to "

adjoining." i appreciate that. there's one more word i am concerned about, the word "simmer." i looked it up in the law dictionary, and summer is a word that talks about overall impressions. i am afraid that makes -- allows for broad conversions. i think the intent was to be accepting and respectful and including other religions, not just convents and monasteries. i changed the word order to accommodate -- to take out the word similar and to show respect for all religions. it is to say it is in a religious order, residences -- residential housing, for example, a convent and monastery, and in talking to

other people, i can accept the word facility in place of the warehousing. but because the subject matter is housing, i thought i would use the word housing. i am asking you to please change item ii, i guess it is called, to read one of two ways. it is in a religious order residential housing, for december, convents and monasteries. or instead of the warehousing, but the word facility. please consider that. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am here on behalf of the housing action coalition. it is taken as two years to get this here. first, i want to thank supervisor wiener for terrific leadership and on taking sponsorship for this. second thing is i cannot say enough good things about how they were planning to permit staff did on this, including

emily and sophie. we need to get this through and pretty soon. if san francisco is ever going to adopt a housing policy for students other than craigslist, it is going to be this. is it ever going to try to reduce the very, very intense demand on our scarce rental stock, it is going to be this vehicle. we need to get it going, get it adopted, and see how the market will react to this. if we can start building the housing that we need. i should of this size that over the last two years, double- emphasize that over the last two years, we have stayed strictly away from a given the rental housing to student housing, i think that is absolutely is the right path to take. leave it alone. build new housing, which is what we implore you to facilitate here. please get this going. thanks. supervisor wiener: thank you.

>> mr. chairman, supervisors, have been involved in this issue for five or six years with the housing action coalition and others. i was being done by former supervisor dufty in the legislation that he got past which was not vetted sufficiently with institutions. we have tried to correct that this time around. the original legislation talked about institutions owning, operating, or controlling student housing under leases for 20 years. we discovered within the 25 or so institutions in san francisco that most were not particularly interested in owning. many were not interested in operating. some were not even interested in collecting the rents. and there needed to be a more flexible legal arrangements set

forth between a developer who would build and own and perhaps operate and perhaps collect the rents and the institutions in order to get the waiver of subsidized housing to make these things affordable. and so we hope this language will do the. in the last two years, there have been no student housing developments under construction. we have one fellow who is interested in it, but he has assured us that he needs this more flexible language to go forward. [bell rings] so i hope you'll take up what supervisor wiener has proposed and moves it forward. and then let's hope that we have not reached the point where we have the critics -- let's hope we have reached the point where we can build several hundred units of housing specifically for students. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you.

if there are any final speakers, please line up? >> lynche that shipment from nob hill nader's -- neighbors. -- linda chapman. i want you to understand what the neighbors are going through. at the time the student housing conversions occurred -- and was not involved with that and have not been until this legislation came up. but before that, we had a similar phenomenon or whole buildings were in doubt. hundreds and hundreds of units for short-term rentals and tic's and demolitions and so on. people suffered. it is the same phenomenon. it is easy to get rid of them. one night, the tennessean in one of the to help it and 18-unit building where they were told they had to leave for demolition -- the tenant's union. but i had to leave a building and could not get there. there were offered $750 a piece

of the would agree to move. they signed and left. 18 units gone. at the same time, we had a 22- unit building for empty up there. if you say to people that it will not keep them off the market for reasons unrelated to the condition of the building -- it had no violations at all. they kept it in deeper seven years. people suffered. in that building, someone had lived for 52 years when they made her get out of the other one, 35 years. in another building, an older man called me who was disabled. he lived with his elderly mother there for 35 years -25-unit building, which was going to be a tic. then they told me about their neighbor who was older than they. they searched for the server -- elderly men and cannot find anything. they found him in a pool of blood. that is what happens. this is the type of thing you can expect to happen in these buildings. it is no different. they can tell you the people moved voluntarily.

people did not just pack up and moved voluntarily. the way the legislation is written, it allows a grandfather in. it must not allow grandfathering. that was not the intent. [bell rings] supervisor wiener: next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is caroline. we represent the university of san francisco. i am here on their behalf. we're here generally to support supervisor wiener's well- reasoned amendments. i do understand, from public comment today, that there is concern about the use of the word "similar" and the context with religious order facilities. i think the use of that word is important because a clarifies, with the exception of not limited, to confidence in monasteries. i think the other point is that the use of the word "similar" is to allow the flexibility. that is exactly the point.

we support the amendment as currently drafted. if you have questions, i am here. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you. any additional speakers? seeing none, may we close public comment. supervisor mar: yes. supervisor wiener: colleagues, comments or questions? >supervisor mar: i just wanted to thank supervisor wiener and others who have spoken about this and have been working on this for many months. i appreciate a lot of the amendments that came to address different concerns from neighbors but also institutions. thank you so much for all the hard work on this, supervisor wiener. supervisor wiener: thank you, mr. chairman. i move forward this item to the full board with a positive recommendation. supervisor mar: colleagues, can we do that without objection? thank you. thank you. please call item number 7 and 8 together. >> item number 7, hearing on the city's response to americans

with disabilities act based hassids brought against small businesses. item number 8, ordinance amending the administrative code and campaign in government to conduct codes to require commercial landlords losing parties to small businesses for uses public accommodations, to act in compliance with laws. supervisor mar: thank you. there to the bottoms here. the hearing and have called on the backs of the american with disabilities act based lawsuits. in many of our neighborhoods, especially the richmond district. then there is supervisor and president david chiu oppose the legislation that should help address some of the issues that are going to be discussed today. this hearing is really important because of the recent ada-based lawsuits better threatening many of our small neighborhood merchants. in district 1, richmond

district, the cafe on 12th and clement or the noodle restaurant or a long time places have been recently sued a court challenge to for not being in compliance with access laws. americans with disabilities access laws. the richmond is not alone. north beach merchants have alerted us. many other districts in the city have businesses that have been greatly impacted or have had to close as a result of such lawsuits, but also other conditions as well. often, a lack of awareness regarding resources the small businesses and property owners can use to come into compliance and/or a misunderstanding of the danger posed by these lawsuits or challenges causes business owners to ignore the threat often. and the danger is that without assistance from our offices and relevant departments of the city, many of our existing mom- and-pop and smaller businesses, especially restaurants but also

many other businesses, may be forced to close their doors in the next few years. it is important we recognize that. we will hear today that making small businesses accessible is and should be one of san francisco's top goals. however, while it is imperative to make sure all our cities businesses are brought into compliance with accessibility laws, state, federal as well, with the requirement that the americans with disabilities act the federal level and other state requirements, many businesses are slow to comply. as a result, they're impacted by lawsuits that often put them out of business. the goal of the hearing that i will emphasize is to raise awareness and understanding on how the federal, state, and local laws govern this access improvements and work. how they come into conflict often is at the local level. also, how the city departments, especially the office of small business, department of building inspection, and others can help make it easier for small business owners to come into

compliance. at the end of the hearing, president chiu will be addressing some of the issues presented today. i would like to thank the director of the office of small business for really, really hard work over, even the past couple of years, the polling this hearing together, as well as the main presenters, the acting director from the mayor's office on disability. thomas from the department of building inspection. john from the department of public works. 10 from the planning department, who we heard from earlier. -- tim from the planning to pry. also, zachary nathan. and the attorney. special thanks to a number of business owners. i know that scott is here, representing a number of small businesses, but also season and ruspa for taking time away from

their businesses to help shape this hearing. i wanted to ask it supervisor and president david chiu wanted to make opening remarks? supervisor chiu: thank you. first of all, i wanted to thank you for your work on this. this has been a problem city- wide. ever since i served on the small business commission, i have actually gotten to know some of our small business advocates. jason and others, because of their leadership on this issue over the years. we know that in recent years, small-business owners have seen an enormous increase in ada- related lawsuits. thousands of them in california. in san francisco, our office of small business and my office, we identified hundreds of businesses that have been sued in our city, including businesses that have had to shut their doors down. i want to perch -- first mention that i know that's supervisor mar as a great lineup of folks to educate our colleagues about these issues. i crafted a proposal in number

of months back that hopefully we will be able to consider today. it addressed some of the issues that we're talking about. and because i unfortunately need to join mayor lee in about eight minutes on an announcement, and i am going to step out for a portion of the hearing. but i wanted to briefly talk about some of the elements of the letters that a proposal i have, because we're going to be combining public comment in this hearing, both for my measure as well as for this hearing. we crafted a proposal to really ensure transparency, compliance with ada loss, and education with tenants and landlords. there were five aspects of what our legislation deals with. the first is it requires the city to give priority to building permit applications for work to help small business tenants come into compliance. secondly, my legislation requires commercial landlords to bring common areas bases used by all users to a space.

public restrooms, grant for interested -- a entrances and exits, to come into compliance with ada laws. or else to disclose to a commercial tenant that the proper did -- property may not meet the accessibility standards the third thing would inform tenants that there might be legally or financially liable for a family to comply. one thing we have heard time and time again is that we have small business tenants who would receive a demand letter from a lawyer and tell the city they had no idea what laws are out there. we want to make sure there is a requirement that tenants be informed about this. the fourth aspect of our proposal includes in a new and amended leases, a requirement with provisions that address their respective obligations of landlords and small business tenants to bring premises into compliance. we want to ensure that tenants and landlords are talking to each other about how they are going to comply and they for

accessibility improvements so that they're doing this with each other as opposed to working together to fight off a lawsuit. the fifth aspect of the proposal would criers our office of small business to develop a pamphlet notice in multiple languages regarding federal, state, and local disability access laws that may require, and require landlords to provide such information to tenants. we want to make sure that everyone is educated and educated in inappropriate in multiple languages. i will be circulating senate -- some technical amendments to clarify what i just described. but want to take a moment and thank all the parties that have worked with my office on this legislation. certainly the small business commission. want to single out scott for the working has done on this. i want to thank the representatives of landlords, commercial landlords, particularly from boma and the san francisco association of realtors. our deputy city attorney has

worked tirelessly on this. and i want to thank my a katherine on this matter as well. one thing i want to mention, if there's one additional amendment requested by the office of small business and supervisor carmen chu, which was to expand the application of this ordinance so it applies not just to small business tenants, which is defined in my legislation as businesses that lease 75 and is published seven of 500 square. less from a commercial landlord, but to expand the definition to all business tenants because every business tonight can be impacted. i am is open to consider this amendment that would like and appreciate feedback from the public office. with that, i know that supervisor mar as a great lineup to to get us on this. supervisor mar: thank you. the first speaker is regina dick-endrizzi will give us an overview on how we got to where we are today. >> thank you.

i am going to provide an overview of where we are, somewhat how we got here. adjacent will explain the laws and will give you greater insight to that -- jason will explain the loss. then we will provide some recommendations that our office has put together. with the years as director of the office of small business and working on this issue, the overarching element is that enforcement is through civil litigation. and i am saying this not to imply ed all that the means of making any improvement is to remove the civil rights elements from individuals with disabilities at all. but what i have come to understand is that through our

government entities, both state and local, because of this overarching element that basically complaints is civil litigation. there is kind of this complicit approach that while a business can defend whatever it is doing without the understanding of the cost of that defending and which, in talking with some of the landlords, would average about $50,000 to be able to defend a lawsuit. the other element that i have observed is that this law has been in place for 20 years. and if civil litigation is the most effective means of achieving compliance, then why are not more individuals with disabilities suing? i think individuals with disabilities do not they