carefully built? even though you have the 40 unit dwelling ask an apartment building and one of those units is offered for a short term rental and you are changing one occupant for the other and it is still an apartment building and it is still a dwelling unit that is being rented unless there is a conversion of use or work out a permit which would be things that we would address, you don't have a lot of changes as far as life safety issues, however, one of the things that we do for that apartment building is routine inspections and so one of the other things that i did suggest to cristina as she get the complaints if there are apartment buildings that

require the routine inspection, we will be happy to look at those buildings and see if they had not a routine inspection within the time period and prioritize those as far as those having the routine inspection and so that is one other thing that we have recommended that we can do and but that typically is of the common area of of the building, and there is not a requirement right now in the housing code, that requires that when you rent a dwelling unit that you have an inspection, there is not. we will sometimes go in to obviously for residential hotels we will do the room to room inspections depend oning what is happening with that hotel, we don't do the ip specs ls of the dwelling units unless there is a complaint or a specific history with that building or a city attorney task force inspection. generally the inspection is in a common area and that has been in the housing code for a while and perhaps in of the things

that you are suggesting if you have a single family dwelling there is not a requirement, after it is built and it receives its certificate of final completing and occupancy, unless there is a complaint, we don't inspect that it is a complaint driven situation, whether it is the whole dwelling unit or a room within that unit, before they rent it, there is no requirement of the inspection, currently. ? now, we are happy to address these, you know as far as the complaints and be proactive for the complaints that the planning gets regarding 41 a, but beyond that you will be

looking at additional legislation. >> has it been discussed to maybe require some sort of a certificate from someone who did look at it? like, we do at special inspections? for instance? >> no. >> there is no discussion of that being included in it. >> no. >> and in relationship to 41 a? is that the question? >> well we are creating a use here that does not exist, it is a commercialization of a portion of a dwelling unit, so, it changes i mean even though it says that it does not change, the zoning, it does, effectively change the actual use of it, so, is it not possible to require some sort of either, if it is not us inspecting some certificate that has been inspected and complies? >> well, one of the things that we look at is when the building and let's say that we talk about that single family dwelling, okay, let's say a

four unit apartment building it was built for a certain amount of people occupying. >> let's talk about the r1. >> and that is an r2, whether they are short term or occupying that apartment building for a short term or long term, it is still the same occupancy where that building was built to accommodate that and it has the proper egress system and the light ventilation and one hour separation and where it becomes a problem, is when there has been a illegal conversion work without permit and those types of things, where there is some kind of a change, and the fact that the person is there for less than 30 days, or 6 months, the building is still constructed to be able to deal with the occupancy unless there is overcrowding and then that is would be a different issue and again that will be something that will be a complaint to the department and we will go out and investigate to see if there is violations of chapter five of the housing

code. >> i would just think that because it has become a commercial action, there is some, i mean this gets into the legal aspect that there is some liability on our part to insure that it is like we do as hotels, for instance. right the only thing is that the building official has not made a determination that it is a commercial use, and it is still a residential use, so from that standpoint, it is still a dwelling unit and it is still a dwelling unit within an apartment house, unless any or at least the way that the codes are written right now, unless there is any of the changes that i have mentioned illegal conversion, work out the permit and overcrowding and those types of things which are currently violations of the housing cold and the building code and then we will address that but the building, as it was constructed if it was built to code is build to be able to handle that couple in that unit for 30 days as opposed to 6

months and i understand what you are saying, and as i said, we were trying to be as pro-active as possible, that is why i offered the routine inspection possibility to the planning department, that i would be more happy to prioritize those. generally they are in good shape. >> we are not seeing the type of maipt nens that we are seeing, if we see something like that we will not hesitate to talk about the city attorney depend og what we see, if we see that one unit looks gorgeous and the rest of the building is run down we are going to do a inspection and we may coordinate with cop to talk to the occupant like we did in the other buildings and we will definitely work with them to see whether or not we can get that information to get into the other units it depends,

however, our experiences with these units that are being advertised on the on-line platforms are that the buildings are usually very well maintained. >> commissioner melgar? >> you are okay? >> yeah. i am fine. >> please. >> i just i feel like you are very confident, you know, and i guess i, you know, just experience of living in san francisco, you know, half of my neighbors have illegal dwelling units and some of them do rent them short term. i am not confident that any of them going to the planning commission saying i am going to rent out a room. anything would trigger an actual inspection of the work that they have done without permits. which a lot of folks have done around town and you know the fact that we also have a old housing stock. and so that building may have been up to code when it was

built. but 100 years later. so the number of things probably did happen. so i guess that my discomfort with all of this is that it is all new and a lot of the rules that were valid ten years ago really are not really, you know, that these units are being marketed all over the world and something that may look good in a picture and that does not necessarily mean that the electrical and the, you know, all of the systems, you know are safe, and so, you know, i am, i guess that i am struggling with understanding between the idea, to the actual how to is this going to work? that we have it all under control. and i... >> well, if i can clarify, commissioner. i am not saying that this proposed legislation is not going to encourage people from renting out spaces in illegal units or areas that were not

previously approved for residential use. that is why the discussion with cristina and if someone wished to propose the legislation that required the inspection for rentals i would be doing my best to facilitate that. but what i am saying that does not exist, and i will be working with her as closely as possible to identify the kind of concerns that you are talking about because we are seeing them already with respect to the mayor's directive and trying to preserve those when it is viable to do so. and to prohibit long term residents from being displaced. so we are kind of dancing on the edge of a pin here. but we definitely recognize that. so when i talk about confidence, i am talking about the legal units not spaces that are converted because the market makes it so easy to market those areas. and then i still have a major concern with and i just want to clarify that. >> i think that we do too. >> okay.

>> okay. thank you. for addressing all of the what ifs. and as best as you could, commissioner walker? >> i would like this to be continued to continue the conversation as the things get developed. >> as we did with the other items that was going through the process. >> so, why don't we agree on that. i mean that i have no issue on that and we are going to have to see how planning put together their team of how they are going to address all of these concerns. >> and soon as we have insight to that, right back here for presentation, to kind of deal with all of the what if questions that you have. >> so continue at the call of the chair? >> if there is no objection? >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? >> okay. >> hello i am breck grad stone and a lawyer at hansen and brit

gid in san francisco and i am just speaking for myself and i have written and published articles about the legislation and the pros and cons and insurance issues and ada and the like and i am going to take the opportunity to come back at the continued hearing and i would be happy to talk to you about some of them and it brings up a big issue about discovering illegal units and illegal work and i have some ideas, but it is not for today. and i would of course, you know, suggest to you to invite the people from the ar b&b in case they are not monitoring your hearings, i know that they monitor several commissions but it may not be yours, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> any further public comment? >> okay, seeing none, there was a motion to continue the items to the call of the chair, is there a second? >> anybody. >> second. >> second.

>> okay. >> there is a motion and a second. and i will do the roll call vote. president mccarthy? >> yes. >> commissioner lee? >> yes. >> commissioner mccray? >> yes. >> commissioner melgar. >> yes. >> and commissioner walker. >> yes. >> and commissioner clinch. >> yes. >> okay, that motion carries unanimously. okay, on to item number 12, commissioners questions and matters. 12 a, inquiry to staff, at this time commissioners may make the inquiries to staff regarding various documents policy and practice and procedures. which are of interest to the commission. >> commissioner walker? >> yes, in response to the information that was presentsed at public comment, also, i got some phone calls about it, the project at 3450, 21st street.

the questions were about the valuation as well as possibly exceeding scope of work. so if you could do a little investigating and come back and present it at the next meeting to just let us know what is happening there. >> yeah definitely, commissioner walker. actually, (inaudible) deputy director have the staff working on those and then make some corrections. >> perfect. >> planning also working on this case and then they have made the complaints. but we can go back and then relook again to make sure that we get the update next time. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> commissioners seeing no more. >> item 12 b, future meet ands agendas, at this time the commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a special meeting and or determine those items that could be placed on the ago ahead and answer da of the next

meeting or the future meetings and our next meeting is on december 17th. >> okay, if there is no objection, will we have everybody here on the 17th. >> yeah. you are not going to be here? >> okay. >> commissioner walker? >> just a future item that we may be can get a specific update about the illegal unit legislation to see if there is some more public out reach that we need to do, if people are not responding. >> okay. >> thank you. >> to talk to the..., yeah. >> that is fine. >> perfect. >> i think that he said about 60 or something, and 50. >> 50, out of that. >> okay. >> fine, i will be good with that. >> okay. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on items 12 aand b? >> seeing none, item 13, review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of august 20, 2014? >> move the minutes of august 20, 2014.

>> second. >> so the motion and a second, and is there any public comment? >> okay, seeing none, are all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> any opposed? >> okay, and the minutes are approved. item 14, adjournment. is there a motion it adjourn? >> a motion to adjourn. >> yes, i would... >> commissioner walker? >> i would like to make a motion to adjourn the meeting in memory of ted gulicson a champion of tenant and residents of san francisco who will be sorely missed by all. >> i second that. >> thank you. >> and we are now adjourned. it is 12:42 pm. >> do you know how long we are going to adjourn for? >> we should probably maybe i guess take about a ten minute break and then, we will reconvene as the abatement and appeals court. >> thank you.

>> thank you. >>