units but we strongly building those two proposals should be considered together. granted that the origins for the dwelling units that will be addressed by those two pieces of legislation their existing illegal opt and newly constructed unit what's going to happen later on the ad us are going to be the same whether their legal listed or get constructed under the proposal the concern is the 2350k9 controls can evaporate rat so there needs to be protections built in we know that the supervisor chiu legislation has specific provisions e-cigarette this. granted again that's right

specific reasons why those provisions in the chiu legislation should be adapted may not adapted in the context but the problem is those pieces are not being considered together and that's one of a number of issues of affordability. so you may be and we all maybe supporting the requested we're to be creating housing affordable by design but unless the regulations that come along with the unit protect against the ellis act we're going to see evictions a few years after those units and those protections are going to disappear so consider those proposals together and weigh the

strengths of the protections that are in the context of this letter >> thank you very much. >> any further public comment. >> good afternoon, tim collin on behalf of action coalition if i knew what supervisor wiener was going to say it would have saved me the trip. he's right by far the lowest low cost of housing and it within the existing envelope it has no virtually effect on neighborhood character. this is a modify sensible approach to a housing crisis it needs to happen raw. there's a particularly approach to address the tens of thousands

of secondary ad u units. you have an opportunity to make a modified correction to allow something general will i constructive to move forward. what we have now is a situation its to easy and i've seen this personally in a lot of the work to build illegal ad u on the west side where i am on rh one neighborhoods that's right loose and loss of streets with few garages they've got a doorbell next to them. i'm suggesting to find a way to allow this to be built with as if you restrictions as possible the alternative seems to be mr. there if the stick is too big

build them anyway. this is a way to bring a new type of construction out to the sunshine and help the city with a legal way of housing. more and more restrictions it's not hard to imagine a powerful incentive to do this we have many, many units that are hard to define and harder to bring them into the sunshine please move quickly on this >> thank you. any further. seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner fung >> first, i want to applaud the creativity of this ordinance and the i

don't know if i have the answer for how this legislation needs to do that. thank you commissioner antonini >> i have some questions and comments about the reserve ability but once this unit is allowed if the owner wants to have their space back they'd have to go before the planning commission for a unit merger. >> that's right this doesn't talk about the loss of unit but some of the issues that are raised that only allows the conversion of space for the non

unit like 9 example from world war ii they took unit and chopped them up in terms of it creating more space in the building that's an important part of looking encroachment but if someone want to competitor that into an ad u that's somewhat unlikely they'll have to get the first permit for the storage for garage or and certainly, if they were seeking a variance it could be not recognizable so that might work as addressing that as the encroachment of the rear yards. i have another concern coming up but i assume from the earlier

discussion with the supervisor it is conforming with the zoning in the area where you're in an rh 2 with one unit you're not allowing changing the zoning is that true or false >> this changes the zoning right now, if you have a family home you can add another unit without additional legislation. this allows the building to go either one or two unit up to 10 unit above the zoning audits it's unnecessary to do the legislation. some of the rh 1980 zoning in the area but this is an area it is not rh one it's a lot of multiply unit believes >> thank you, supervisor this may be fine her if there's a lot

of support in the neighborhoods which there seems to be but neighborhoods are afraid of this and don't want this in their neighborhood like the rh 1 neighborhoods i agree with them i support this in a modified version i don't want to see it citywide i know we're only doing this but formula retails in neighborhoods and now their citywide so i don't want it to be a trojan hours. and then i mentioned the part will preston. my other concern is about zoning it would apply like low ceilings and electrical and plumbing and i assume any unit would have to conform in all those categories.

the building requirement will still apply >> so this is an issue and i actually should have raised this before because in all past efforts to and i think for example, in eastern neighborhoods there was a program the problem has always been with legalization has been in the building code we've he never addressed the older buildings it's impossible to comply with the building code so in our both legislatures we've got a similar approach instructing the building inspection to work to develop alternatives for the building

provisions we can relax so there's some basic ones we can touch but other ones dbi can develop alternatives that will allow this to move forward. >> 38 they would, compliant and yes. >> and other examples under the building code we're trying to instruct dbi to go through a process working with experts and issue bulletins how you go about doing that. >> well, thank you superstition and then a couple of other concerned. earlier they said it would be using space that's not currently living space like garage and living spaces we have parking

requirements but this is something the neighbors inviting motive not be happy because there's a shortage of parking and now their chasing more parking spaces >> this is a concern that some people have and i want to go over a a a few points. first of all, and i know my clean air act supervisor farrell had trod legislation that allows car garages to be used other than for garages if you walk around neighborhood in san francisco a high percentage of garages are being used for other things than storing cars. frankly, if we're going to use those garages for something other than storing cars i'd rather be the 685-year-old gay

guy who got ellis act out of my united. we're letting people store stuff in their garage but god forbid if we let someone live in there. it's not the issue but in addition the castro area has if not the lowest one of the lowest rates of car ownership in the city i don't think it's going to be a big issue here >> thank you, supervisor. >> the addition of one dwelling unit wouldn't actually require one now parking space so if they're adding one unit you're not required to add one parking space. the unit was used for parking is now going to be used for housing. in many cases that's been ugly

go a used for parking. there were concerns about 9 convert ability to condominiums well unfortunately, because of recent legislation it's virtually impossible to get inform the tic lottery so i'm okay with making the units over seven hundred and 50 feet it has to do with a existing you'll cast a wider net your needing someone who needs more space. i think i'm tentatively in favor of this with the modifications but i wouldn't be able to vote

you can monitor if you feel like spending the time the rents being charged by any interference of what an owner can be charging it would be a violation and cause this legislation not to be allowed if challenged in court. so if it's the case i think i'm going to be okay with it >> commissioner moore. >> i would echo commissioner fung enthusiasm we heard every gets legislation that is a specific and it mad it more interesting to read and i want to support it. i have a couple of thoughts that's something i want to discuss with ann marie.

the question of no cap i would be interested in real estate the cap but interested for you to engage in talking about a minimum. i i did not this that the neighborhood your suggesting is for macro unit. you actually brought the legislation of the macro unit while it talked about how they are a certain type of housing in support of students and more collective housing of individual homelands are the proper place for macro unit and i will suggest that the department look at more affordable housing standards which were developed by people like architects like tom by commanding minimums for

habitual ability and those units that are included a closet space and something by which one could do currently other than the micro unit. i would encourage that to be added. i was also concerned there might be a comprehension of pitting restrictions into the legislation by which the short-term rental would not be allowed because that's disruptive to any neighborhood you want to avoid the disruptions of people living there. the idea that was brought to my attention there would be a time specific mentioned by which the legislation is coming forward by the mid-west. the existing building envelope

would be defined by january 2014 so that no projects which are currently trying different means to a endanger would not be allowed to basically benefit from this legislation. i'm also concerned about the design review assisted by others would have some form of earth review. the homes in the neighborhood that you're trying to apply their electric they are different and their sensitive to a skill looking at penetration materials, etc. so this the done sensitivity. the square footage of those modifications are acquit high and for that reason an address

care should be spent on doing that. i think the legislation is fantastic and support of the word to change of ad u the in-laws has too many negative and illegal memories for most people using a fresh word is better to how it applies. at this time i believe the neighborhood you've chosen is to be a trial is a correct one this is easier and sensitively done in the housing types and using the topographic. when you come to different kinds of neighborhoods this needs to be examined in the form it's coming forward. i would encourage my closing

comment i encourage this because you're trying to achieve similar things that are possible they should be complimenting and engaging each other and come down as a climatey pie >> thank you commissioner hillis. >> i'm very supportive this makes a lot of sense we side people building into this spades for an center bedroom in the garage it make sense to try to use that space for new housing to be built. i think the only issue we're noted taking it fafrtd like in the neighborhood of the castro and district 5 the west end

edition but i understand to go slow and see if this works. the existing i mean, i shared scott's concern where his contempt on i don't think we'll get people building storming space into their rear yard unit maybe the bottom is storage and the top space is living area. so i don't think we should preclude to convert if you're going to build 3 unit and one story is going to be an expansion of our garage it's actually that expanding for ad u in the future. it's highly unlikely people are most likely going to build living space.

i don't think we should freeze in time now the building there's plenty of controls and ways people can argue about conditions. the supervisor wiener brought up one year for the permitting process. i mean i'd advocate for 3 to 5 years to see if there's unit being built some critical mass of units we could analysis and the seven hundred and 50 square foot cap it makes sense to lift the cap. >> yeah. i think one of our goals was to produce fairly modified unit but i'm saying

this is like, you know, throw myself other than the train tracks the commission wanted to make that recommendations i'll consider it but we put that limit in to avoid you know the huge massive opt. i will also is that the minimum size is we don't say that the same minimum size in the rest of the city you can go to the minimum anywhere in san francisco and so our minimum is the same minimum that every other housing unit has in san francisco. >> okay. thanks. >> thank you. >> i so people talk about in-laws being role controversial and i've never seen a thornier

issue we shouldn't single on the vacation issue you see the landlord are upset and tenants that get mad at landlord and each other and it's like it's a city that's complicated and the city is divided. the issue of a b and b rentals is an issue the issue for those is the same exact issue it doesn't matter if you're adding the unit tomorrow or one hundred years we know that the law is clear it's illegal to enter into a rental contract out of a hotel for less than thirty days period. so that law applies here as well. there's no need to make any other provisions and it's a

matter of enforcement so i don't know what the ultimate solution is. thank you. commissioner sugaya. >> oh, yes. i have a bunch of disjointed statement. first of all, in terms of alternate building codes that's important and supervisor wiener revokes there's a precedent for their performance standards rather than strict standards there's a precedent for n this we encourage the building department to take this on sooner than later are those going to require come back to us for approval or is it acknowledge only a building

department issue? >> i believe it has to come to the department as well. >> to the department in which case i think obviously since this is housing oriented it will be included in the outline between our department and dbi in terms of the overall approach in accelerating housing production. >> it would expect the focus is for building that are 20 percent affordable housing it's more focused on the affordable housing side of the equation. i don't know how to document that >> no, that would not be included in the - >> so we're caught up in the

same harassments we've got right now. >> if we want to accelerate that and make sure incentive wise the process mr. be short rather than going to dbi and planning the supervisor could work something in to make sure those kinds of units are also streamlined throw in someway. >> i think they all should be shortened. i love the mayor and everybody is working together. i want to see us working toward staffing and funding the department it doesn't take 4 to six months for a review officers to review the project i don't care if it's an in law or whatever it should be faster

>> i wanted to add for in clarity theirs not a required planning hearing and this will be made without a public hearing and further awhile currently adding. >> unit would require a publication and the next week hearing will remove the publication for the dwelling unit so if both processes were used p that would speed this up. >> supervisor chiu's legislation addresses the unit to be legal highlighted. >> yeah. by it makes a boarder legislation for dwelling units. >> go ahead. >> how about the yards could