defined oh, great i have another one hundred and a half it/should have all the relevant sections that apply and sections that height and bulk that's not found in the proposed protective packet how do you approve that. >> you have residential lunld into residential and commercial and some uses that are principally permitted in some places now not right now and now principally permitted and cu things that's changed well, you know just to be clear 52 i want to say i'd hand over the codes i like to go into the weeds i'm not talking about the medical cannabis dispensaries i should

look at this and grant the continuance for 6 weeks or how long it takes to have an acting group i hope i've confused you completely (laughter) thank you. >> commissioners doug i was asked by members of the coalition sitting ton this commission to look at the rewrite of the code it's at admiralable effort but it's clear in the development is to make to easier to understand and several organizations saying their confused and there's things they don't understand it seems like easy for the

commission to say look let's take a few weeks of extra time and have the department sit down i noticed for t yourselves uses terms like words that don't have definitions i think i understand it is not totally clear as to how the depictions are going to play into the uses that are allowed or not allowed within the code i'm encouraging you as a gesture of goodwill there's no rush to get to substantive initiatives i am interested in the short-term rental it's not covered in this code and i imagine the board of supervisors

will take care of that but it seems like only common sense and goodwill for you to ask the vice president to hammer out the concerns so everyone understand and narrow it detain to the issues that are substantive that we'll need to deal with thank you for your consideration. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? >> sue hester i've been going through the code he since it was a skinny thing that big about 2 hundred pages and i did some filing of recent amendments and i was really paying attention to the floating definition in the first part and

in the mcd and mixed part of the existence of office uses guess what very controversial the office uses shade into definitions in the mcd dings and the other definition i'm familiar with the depictions we used when prop m was passed because i kind of worked that section other things i'm paying attention to now is how you have dealt with housing and hotels commercial and residential throughout the city the legislation that is waiting on the mayors deck this doesn't really help you out because we still have ambiguity in housing dings there's also housing dings

that are in and out when our dealing with institutions like the academy of art university that is coming soon to you and they've evolved into an institution that has 2 thousand students in housing in san francisco and they're not organizations so the distinction of student housing is really going to be huge as this commission is faced with dealing with them as apple institution and the other thing on our calendar not on our calendar but on your calendar a month from now is the roads defined in the code as a housing use are going to go to a commercial use commercial tourist eye they're planning on this and those are 5 hotels if you look at the

definition residential and the reality is they're going to go to commercial use and group housing as a replacement for sro uses and when you look at the details in weeds i get into the weeds between housing, office, hotel i'm not even dealing with the restaurant there their own concentration and all of a sudden there's a new resolution in the definition this needs some serious really serious meetings thank you. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? >> good afternoon, commissioners and public i'm marching i'm speaking for

myself we're requesting another continuance this proceedings has a familiar ring we have a non-elected government agency planning their simplifying changes no changes to the rewriting of the code no one knows about this this is not coming out of the elected body by a now and then agency no one t is watching this agency public officials and the public went through months of administration code changes and came up with a resolution those are an attempt by the non elected body to circumvent the projects that will be appealed planning department appears to be following the math used by the sfmta when they stimuli e simplified the policies for on

street parking saying they're not changing anything look at the traffic jams and look at the public comments and tell me nothing was changed we don't need those problems creeping into our housing please put this on the back burner. >> is there any additional public comment? >> good afternoon, commissioners madam chair judyburg witnesses there the coalition of san francisco neighborhoods i want to reiterate the request for a of week continuance we would greatly and you would greatly benefit from that there too repeat i don't want to

repeat he everybody else but our transportation coalition for san francisco neighborhood transportation committee chair has spoken both first and second vice presidents are and the you as well our vice president rose high on a hill it calls to me son is a true code disburse are you and so of her suggestions have be have been take into account it seems like the rest of the suggestions are valid and should be looked at carefully if you could please grant a 6 week continuance we'll be very grateful thank you very much. >> is there any additional public comment okay seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner richards. >> yeah. i guess when i walked into this room i had a different opinion where i was going to go

this has been going on in 18 months i've been to too committee meetings and it is needed as the gentleman said we're going to take something that is confusing and try to make it better so everybody doesn't have to really find it hard to understand i've gotten a lot of e-mail on this and from a neighborhood person i guess i'm not over the line it's an never ending process i was wondering what those folks were asking for its a 6 week continuance i truly don't believe there's anything substantive or changes that are being made no fast ones being pulled as an non-elected body, however, i sat here two weeks

and heard john get up and tell how we were viewed about our transparency and since those changes those codes have been around since 1996 and only asking for a 6 week expectation let's do one more 6 week extension not everybody is going to be happy at the end of the 6 weeks that's the end i hope the staff is noticing everybody and if you don't participate you lose our chance to participate personally it's a never-ending process but 6 weeks continuance is okay. >> commissioner antonini. >> i think we have a gentleman that wants to speak i know it's

been closed but. >> claims he couldn't hear and i have a hearing device hates imperfect. >> the public comment portion is closed if so chair choose to reopen it, it's entirely up to her. >> okay sir, you, go ahead and speak. >> i didn't hear very well good afternoon commissioners and commissioner president wu i'm john over 40 year period have participated i was a committee activist before the commission as well the coalition of neighborhoods and also a member of the board of supervisors and during those periods i really - i commend you for holding the hearing but i really am very

concerned about the assault of having a 4 hundred and 50 some page of documents being reviewed for 3 minutes how can a public hearing be a valid public hearing to review a one section of 4 hundred and 68 page document even with a number of hearings a 4 hundred and 68 page document i think this violates what is a valid protective hearing process if our city and 40 years ago the staff were submitted to the commission a typewritten document and would lay out the changes were made and if anything significant like this 4

hundred and 68 page document it would be submitted in sector and get intelligent review and input from the public this hadn't happened with this 4 hundred and 68 page document i urge you to continue this hearing and ask the department to make inspections in maybe as many as 8 operate segments and clearly marked changes of the from the original of what is being proposed for our action i think this is the most valid way to proceed i have to ask what is the department trying to hide if it i were to pass it you

can ask what are you trying to hide and it the whole process be summit in segment and making changes from the original segments thank you. >> okay public comment is closed. >> to the members of the public i believe a number of you are here for the next item i want to let you know we'll be taking a break after this section. >> commissioner antonini. >> i agree with commissioner richards i'm going to be supportive of a continuance bogging because i'm somewhat confused might have i appreciate all the hard work that staff is doing trying to simplify the cord by aaron starr those are complicated issues but some of the things we can focus on the continuance there are charges

made that there's a bordering between what is in residential and what is in residential commercial is there any validity to that and no there is not. >> the other thing interests charges that a lot of things are being allowed in the neighborhoods as a right that are not as a right now they've liltd sro's and student housing and group housing and mcds and whole laundry list of things they've interpreted that are going to be allowed in the neighborhood that are not allowed now. >> i was thrown off when i had the meeting that meeting is like meeting with 40 different neighborhood groups in the city that issue did not come up but on page one hundred 78 of the ordinance it talks about the institutional uses currently,

the institutional uses like the community facilities and hospitals and public facilities and religiously institutions and childcare schools require a conditional use authorization that's how it is currently used and will be. >> that's not something that will be change. >> i've not made any changes to the controls in the residential districts. >> since it's a long document i don't see any harm in time for everyone to sort of obey made knowledge thatable and somebody said boil it down to the essential changes that are occurring in the brief summary thought is changes that are significant i realize there is movement of things from one category or one article to another but the what everybody is concerned of significant

changes. >> in our case report i listed autopsying all the changes that i thought were significant and some are not significant and no significant changes to what's happening in our districts particularly. >> okay mr. star i appreciate to the i'll be in support of the continuance we've approved things in the past i think this will be a great simplification but we've gone through a po process and i'm not saying there's a problem with the po now but the more we can get hoping people to buy into it the less likely for endless appeals. >> may i talk on the

continuance i was on vacation well deserved i might add in my absent the assistant zoning director were meeting and i had no questions in my in box i was gone but i prefer this to be 4 weeks. >> and to the members of the public the time to get the explanations and get our outreach procedures are during the continuance hearing we don't want to came back come back and hear there is no questions so i think the field will be open to contact staff and have our questions answered and if there are questions that are not answered to our satisfaction giving me a call or others a

call and we'll try to get the questions answered. >> what is laser the code is hard to read and i believe that the intent of the legislations to make it simply in the future there's been commented been 4 hundred pages but only one action moving all the dings only the first of 3 steps i feel what is challenging it there is really just needed to think education sections on what is this doing i believe staff when they say there is no substantive changes i was in the northeast legislation and remembering back to that time when we broke it adopt button pieces i feel this

is about moving pieces around to better understand them i would have been ready to move forward today but if there's a continuance i feel like the session should be focused on trying to understand what the section is and to the members of the public i'll ask you to hold specific language to say here's something it says p next to it now this is specifically our concerns i'm not seeing those kinds of examples commissioner johnson and thank you very much. >> i feel like i'm going to stand on my own i'm not in support of the continuance i feel that mr. star and the administrator has spent open the process this is only phase one

of a multi phase project that will be given in pieces and will have a public you know will have public input but i want to address so i want to address a couple of things and move on i have questions about the decisions that were made and i know that mr. star really stuck to his promise and not make substantive changes i want to ask about a suggestion that maybe mr. star felt were on the gray line but i won't do it if we have a continuance but i'll say a couple of things and would love to potentially move to see if there's a majority on the continuance item so we can move on to the next item ms. high on

a hill it calls to me son gave a document and without being disrespectful i tried to get through to for the record i was sitting on the excision on the july hearing and reviewed the video from the june hearing i read the entire document all 4 hundred almost 5 hundred pages by august 31st and had it continued to today in october i feel prepared open this i would not support a tennis one because of my original point of the time put into this i agree with the commission chair wu this process needs to happen on the clean up portion it is about education and not about the standard changes when i think about it i feel like if there's a semicolon here or there that

there are those kinds of issues in the current 14 planning code and those issues today so i don't feel this simplification as to or detracts from the percentage of the significant of those types of issues in a 14 hundred planning code so i don't think those changes can't be administratively fixed in the future and the public process should happen over the next month's but it's more of an education and not necessarily there is something substantive it is going to come out of the public comment there are more questions that last year clarified by staff rather than questions that will bring up questions about the validity of

the work and for that reason i don't support a continuance but i definitely respect the other commissioners thoughts and the way it goes and hold up on my minor comments about the changes. >> commissioner hillis. >> first, i want to commend mr. star you don't step to the front of the line and say hey, i'll take on the code because you have to come to commission hearings like this where obviously you're not trying to rezone the communities for airbnb you've taken on a nobile task we appreciate it and the people that are kind of speaking against it will come to appreciate the new formulate i certainly did when i read it

thank you for that i'm not giving more time i'm especially happy to have you put you're good skills to other tasks other than simplifying the pages i prefer it being less weeks i'm fine if commissioner president wu we hear about the 4 hundred and plus pages ever hearing we hear the time has been short but i ask people to focus on specific comments you did a good job of responding so over the next couple weeks we continue that dialog not only the old it's long and

complicated but a here's specification i want to clarify and reclarify i appreciate that it made it clear for me as commissioner richards. >> i think this is the first time i've been through this kind of thing i'll ask the folks who got up and seven hundred what they did around asking for a continuance since this the first of 3 sects i don't want to have a repeat in cigarette two and three our all on notice to know we're serious and move this forward and there's a lot of work to do and mr. star spent 18 months on this i'll ask when if the continuance is accepted if you do come back and speak before the commission i want to said and hear from you whether

you feel in the trust of this commission we're really not rewriting the existing code but cleaning it up so if we were rewriting this code he'd be here for years one other quick point before i make the motion it is difficult to receive lots of communication at the 11th hour if you have questions will you contact me earlier i'd like to get involved and hiccup e help you i'll make a motion to continue this for 4 weeks and the staff to have a notice of meeting to make sure the specification are asked and and the second. >> and if he could check a date and 4 weeks will land us on

november 30th. >> so it's a pretty full calendar but we should put it there. >> can i ask one question you said public notice we sent a meanwhile to all neighborhood groups and the people interested in legislation. >> the folks. >> the folks didn't get f that i mean. >> certainly the folks in the room you're hearing me saying this i'm putting it on your backs to get to our constituents if they have an issue he'll send out an e-mail but get out the word is that clear mr. star. >> commissioner antonini.

>> i'll support this but admonish the speakers to come back to staff if you feel there are things that are different i want them to be substantive they've been researched and are, in fact, changes that are occurring not only changes but, in fact, we find out they're not changes but let's have a dialog in 4 weeks and hopefully something to support on the 30th. >> commissioners we have a motion and a second to continue this matter to november 30th commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson no commissioner richards commissioner fong and commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to 2 with commissioner johnson and commissioner fg