own cars. i think we need to look at this and be advisable some districts that will welcome this and we should have the ability for the different districts to decide rather than one-size-fits-all. then some of the other things i've talked about some of my suggestions as to requiring everyone to be surveyed and then the issue of a condo sale there will be issues when someone wants to upgrade and you know it doesn't hurt to have an additional unit for sale not only for rent we have to be fair to people who are trying to finds rentals and it will allow the owner to food the repairs

for the one unit to be sold off. i believe that supervisor wiener stated last week he doesn't want to opine on whether or not the additional unit he was allowed to be in this ordinance would be added whether it be a rental or ownership unit. i want to see this by the way, i think it will meet another need for people to guy homes to get into san francisco. i know that another part 0 allows nor pass on to the tenant this should be looked at so some degree the tenants are living there knowing with the unit is not legal sometimes they're not aware of the situation but i think that some of the costs i don't know what percentage might be allowed to be paid by the tenant over a period of time because their take advantageing

of the life and safety and a prorated percentage being paid by the tenants makes sense to me. then i guess there a or is a government code for one unit to be addressed to 0 single-family home. i'm not sure how 80 this plays into 10 or more units a city attorney and legal council will have to look at. let's see that's most of my concerns. this is an important issue. there isn't this huge rush to have this happen we've been looked at this for years. some of the points i've brought up should be considered a a

continuous of a month or so would allow the neighborhoods p to weigh in and be more refined with the neighborhood groups and others who have concerns as well as the concerns impressed by public. i agree with one of the speakers who said giving them thirty or 90 days is a little bit quick they have to make an agreement but the thing would be phased over a period of time to make it affordable >> if i may respond quickly. >> i would ask the commission not to move forward with this. we've had a thorough 10 month working group process with any

representations from many part of the city and we've responded to all requests to sit down and meet with this legislation and we'll continue to honor that. if there are other neighborhood associations who want to meet with them we'll do so. as unify alluded commissioner antonini that has come up in the past and the city has had a lot of time to think about this in one form or another and those questions have been asked before we have not gotten to a place where people want to move forward. to my second point as the supervisor alluded to we're in a housing crisis and the purpose of this legislation first and foremost is to preserve our existing stock so without going

into the other policies you've pointed to we do ask we move forward today >> i want to ask some clarifying questions. i think there's a member of the rent board here human resources okay. so if i have what a single-family home with an in law unit in the basement is that protected under the rent board today >> my understanding from the rent board is that they treat the in law unit as a rent control unit and the single-family unit above or only the in law unit the unauthorized in law unit. >> so if this legislation go forward that unit continues to be under rent control. >> that's correct. >> commissioner hillis. just to follow up on that does

the single-family did it become a 2 story unit >> perhaps the city attorney can help us answer that question and deputy city attorney. unfortunately, i'm not versed in this >> i think supervisor wiener brought this up and it got confusing if you have a two-story home it's not two units subject to rent control. >> it was my understanding from the conversations with the rent board as well the second unit that is illegal would be treat as a rent controlled unit by rent board. additionally i believe that not all single-family dwellings are contempt from 9 rent control it's the date and it's subject

to provisions of rent control and we are i think working more alcohols with the rent control board and having in house training their staff comes to our department to explain the process. that's my understanding of the situation >> it would be good to clarify i know when i started on the board of appeals. people were you're going the legality to lastly each other. the city was trying to get rid of the unit or put in a violation. i'm supportive of this legislation it's something we've talked about and it's one the third rail people didn't want to talk about i applaud supervisor chiu for stepping up and resolving the issues. i think this is great.

on the 10 unit issue. i hear what you're saying you don't want to mimic supervisor wiener's legislation but we'll get single-family homes in larger buildings where the sprinkler system is in its difficult to add a unit to the building but some ideas on this 10 unit maybe to look at the size of the building o. they can take two unit because their large storage in the bottom or a lot of garages so i encourage the additional unit for 10 unit or more maybe it's 10 units in high density neighborhood or larger footprint buildings that can take the two

additional units but i'll recommend in that direction. and on the owner move in situation if you - an owner move in happened 3 years ago and there's an illegal unit you can illegal legalize that unit post the date of this legislation >> i believe what the city attorney recommended to us the most legal way to move forward with not incentivize property owners to evict tenants to raise rent from the current tenants are paying is to create this no fault eviction waiting period but to begin it at the time that

the legislation is enacted right now we have a march date. we'll likely change the date to the date of package. there are issues with basically applying this waiting period retroactively. so we've been advised it is the best way to move forward >> you don't want to penalize a tenant for the 3 years they didn't anticipate. so i you think it's good for the unit and the attended in the unit so thank you >> thank you. commissioner sugaya >> yeah. i'm going to make a motion to recommend approval to the supervisor both supervisors with the addition of the staff

recommendations and the moisture number one i guess so the up front process of screening includes the planning department with respect to their suggestion of whatever and that number 9 i don't know if there's a consensus on the board i'm perfectly happy with the way it is but i don't know i'll make the motion with number 9 include. >> i'll second. >> commissioner borden. >> yeah. i wanted to say this approaches an issue for a a long time creating stability in the unit people aren't forced to go through this process they don't have the choice so. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'm going to make a motion to continue that are from the

statements i've made earlier and the changes before it comes back to us making more universal monitoring of the unit throughout the city and if there's no second for that then i have some comments. >> do i hear a second. >> no. >> hearing none i have concerns about 4 of the staff recommendations. first of all, eliminating the need for the zoning administration and dbi to both be involved is not - i know there should be checks and balances. i'm not saying there's a problem either way but at least planning has a stack income it as well as permitting. it's wise both parts of the planning department have input in the process and i'd like not to see that in there but the

original legislation and also for the home that is in an area that requires a parking place they should have to have the parking requirement it's going to make the situation worse where the garage is being used for retains and i'd like to eliminate the thirty day construction it has to be spread out maybe a commitment to agree to make those within thirty days but try to start working thirty days. finally, i'd like to see the owner of the unit have the ability in the future if he so condo maps it to be able to sell it separately just and they sell their home individually they may want to keep the unit and sell

their own hounding house to link those together restricts the rights of the homeowner. i don't like that provision >> commissioners there is a motion and a second is there any desire to include any of the proposed amendments. hearing no. there's a motion and second to adapt a recommendation for approval amending staffs proposed modification item one to include the planning department. commissioner antonini. commissioner borden. commissioner hillis. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya. commissioner fung and commissioner president wu >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to one with commissioner antonini voting against. >> thank you very much. >> commissioners we can move on

to continuing our your regular calendar item 6 the san francisco plaza informational presentation. >> just waiting for the technology.

sorry. i think we're ready to start. good afternoon, commissioners i'm ken with the economic workforce development. we're pleased to be in front of you to do a presentation on in conjunction with the san francisco plaza program by way of a brief introduction in line with a trend san francisco is

much better in recent years at producing open spaces where people can talk to their neighbors. it's from the planning department pavement to parts programs and are doing a lot to enhance the viability of the city. just some examples of open spaces one might be mint plaza and another jane warren plaza and the mission on 22nd street and the san jose gaga are a speaks. there's other spaces the plazass. as we get more and more of those spaces coming on and on online we're reilly the city doesn't

efficiently manage those open spaces. those spaces are not rec and park department spaces and largely don't make sense as park per say they are being managed in a hodgepodge way by the rec and park department and the real estate department and by puc and we're not seeing 0 cropped way to activate those spaces. the desires are much smaller than neighborhood spaces and its desire to manage them in a way that reflects neighborhood values and can differentiate what happens in the spaces what a particular neighborhood is looking for. so we've been working with the citywide groups to design a program that allows us to work with the neighborhood partners

to help program and maintain those spaces. i'm going to ask my colleague robin to go through the plan and planning staff will talk about the zoning changes that are proposed. i'll remind you there is informational with that, i'll have robin start >> sorry i'm a little bit shorter than ken. good afternoon, commissioners i'm robin with the economic and workforce development. thank you for hearing us. in order to develop this approach we've got any stakeholder feedback. the stakeholders included largely groups that have public

space and arts and music basis program expertise. those are various agencies o e w t is partnering with the real estate distraction o e w d formed a working group that includes members from the entertainment division and sfmta and the streets and epcot and the planning department and also dpw and real estate. we've collaborated with other city agencies as necessary so, now that i've described some of the stakeholders involved in the process and the city agencies that were involved let me take a few minutes to industry the background. san francisco has come to be known nationally for her

innovative approach in the realm. in ways that leverage civic participation. the first example i have here emanates from the parks program we have some staff here. the pavement program has parks that are maintained by neighborhood. another program that is an example is the streets parks program that is a partner between the parks relines and creates mediums and stairways. an additional project that the supported is the sidewalk garden project that's the friends of the urban effort they enhance sidewalks with gardens that captures stormwater while

beautifying san francisco. well san francisco has developed stewardship partners that supports the garden and mediums and the transformation of parking lot. the city has yet to dpw develop a systemic approach. to let you know about the general criteria. you can see the plazas criteria so we're talking about the spaces that are larger than 2 thousand square feet not large sidewalk but plaza like spaces and city owned property that be located in active areas like bicycle hubs or another nationally activated areas they have to have temporary intervene

and or maintenance those plaza has the transformation that kwo could be structural in providing benefits in neighborhoods has our city grows. in addition in many cases those spaces could provide more opportunities to visitors to relax and enjoy the farmer's markets and local feed and retail stunts and the opportunities for this plazas. some of the plaza like spaces e measurable that clearly enhanced those but the management plans are not always clear. those spaces fall outside of rec and park department jurisdictions. in addition their distinct from other initiatives they're not temporary. they have been in san francisco

but usually the city vice presidents are trying to resolve the cases often reintending the whole and not coordinating with other city efforts. i have a list of the incentives temporary experiments like the temporary pavement projects as well as the in kind armies that's a program through the planning department. and an incentive would the planning department incentive. this diagram will be helpful. potential plazas will emerge from stakeholders collaborative efforts you see where it says

development in kind neighborhood if one of those initiatives on the left and a has broad support but the strategy is unclear and there's a potential for a stewardship it could move to the gray box. if it's beyond the city's existing resources. the space needs to fit the plaza program criteria. accident diagram emphasize it's not about creating the plazas but finding the long term solutions. so more detail on the structure felt program itself. it has 3 major components one is to coordinate city process and streamline the processes it has

developed new tools to lower the permitting costs when possible especially in the areas of street closures and to lower barriers to those activist events. it will provide a long term home for projects created through city programs. instead of the city continuing to approach each of those opportunities individually it will be a systemic approach. in addition it is based on community based stewards. they would have to identify their stake in the community and the potential support they've submit plaza plans and it will go through an rfp process or similar process.

all plaza needs board of supervisors approval and adaptation. i'd like to he reiterate that the plazas program we're describing a program framework optional. the plazas needs to be adapted on a plaza by plaza case. the program will strife to network the effort of the citywide plaza stewards by creating opportunity for the stewards to communicate with each other and collaborate and share best practices and it will feinstein sure that the plazas stewards are benefiting and the outcomes are being achieved. the third is directing the revenue. revenue generated by a steward in one plaza could only support operations of that plaza. that's at the fundamental approach. it is for the privatization of

public space by guiding the money back into the operation of that plaza. that's called up clearly in the legislation and will be between the city and the profound stewards. any revenues generated by the operational costs that are beyond will be directed back to the program to fund eye sight programs in the administrative costs. it will have the plaza maintenance goal by working with the folks to create the sustainability over time. so explain the side a little bit. because plazas could be adapted could have jurisdiction status if that's a read word. we need city plazas and street

plazas. to first, the street plaza. you can see here the example. street plazas would be right-of-way their technically streets. this may be the best path for the plazas that has vehicular needs. a plaza encroachment permit will sdient stewards functions. those bases will be under the jurisdiction of public works. the city plazas are city and land but that spaces not streets. the agreement for the city plaza will be detailing the zoning changes you'll hear about from the planning staff open event streamlining could support of the activation of these types of

plazas. so activation we want to give you examples of activation those are activation types of event in various stages in san francisco. now that we've talked about the types of plazas let's golden gate get back to the steward of the plaza. my apologizes for the complexity of the slide i'd like to ask your patience how a steward will be designated it's on and on online and in your packets. if we start at the doted green box plazas emerge from various