that are 3 or more or 2 stories over basement with 5 denials built between january 31st, 1978, the first ordinance will provide an incentive for property owners to comply with the seismic retrofit program some financial incentive currently existing for this program but this ordinance will allow additional unit and revenue generated from potential renting out of the unit will help the property owner to offset their costs of seismic

retrofitting those are second in-law units those are units that are subordinate to the compared to other units in the building because of their location in the building and on the ground floor it is usually lower ceiling heights that may have side entrances and maybe less the exposure and this ordinance restricts the size of the units to be limited by the existing footprint in the building in the existing building therefore this creates a subordinate nature and therefore those units are known to be affordable by design because of the new units being built as supervisor scott wiener mentioned this is supported by

many research academy research and looking at the rental prices on the rental listing on the websites and the specification of this ordinance is similar to the castro legislation before you a year ago that allowed for similar units it will require the units to be rent controlled in the existing building and provide administration waiver for certain planning code requirements for open space and rear yard and parking the planning department and planning commission supported this naming the the first providing of market rate unit that are being built right now in the market, and, secondly, those units will

serve as an financial incentive to help the property owners to upgrade their belief and the hours stocks will serve the city with earthquake repair and you'll be able to stay in our housing in case of an earthquake rather than finding temporary housing that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions questions. >> thank you very much for that presentation. >> supervisor scott wiener mission bay anything to add. >> i believe supervisor kim may have something. >> sure we'll go ahead and go into public comment i have 3

cards (calling names) okay tom why don't you come on up and tim get in line. >> good afternoon, supervisors tom with the liveable city i'm here to speak in favor of the amendment this is a great way to conserve the building materials and conservatives neighborhood character where do you put the new units and the thing about the ordinance those spaces will be in the buildings that are currently being used i mean, i'll not go into details the reasons were explained by did supervisors and staff we think it is an outstanding piece of legislation a great way to add the rent control unit in the

city it is possible through the in law legalization we hope you'll support and say kudos to supervisor wiener for the housing legislation before this board we appreciate all you're doing to relieve the housing crisis. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm alyssa representing spur thank you for the opportunity to allow me to speak. >> i'm sorry maybe speak into the microphone. >> seismic retrofitting to make it easier to build the building unit creating more homes across the city it didn't change the impact on the neighborhood infrastructure ada use provides free pays for the housing units

that are affordable by design because their size location and physical restraint this ordinance provides incentive for property owners to have earthquake safety for seismic earthquakes conditions this is a great opportunity to my own spur supports this and thanks supervisor wiener for his sponsorship. >> thank you. next speaker. >> tim cologne i'd like to commend supervisor wiener on this common places legislation it unit two vital issues for protecting the housing stock and building new housing that is not affordable the next great earthquake will tear the hell out of housing it is vitality important we upgrade those

buildings that are subtle older and less up to code we like this legislation gives a clear financial envelope to help it is costing but more importantly it promotes the type of housing we love it is smaller cheaper and should be located throughout the city we have a strong policy interest in wanting to see the nabtdz around san francisco there's no single solution to the affordable crisis by this is a good one that should be tripod and put into use we don't want to see restrictions that takes away the incentive we want people and building owners to take advantage of this it should go ahead as is thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> it's important to understand

the soft story program is a key to air force the series dwelling units help provide an incentive within 4 years the unit will be paid for if you tie the soft story program with those units you'll courage 10 thousand and 2 thousand units will be added in the program we need to clear up a couple of issues in the building code the soft story program didn't allow you or an soft story work it has to be tied together so you're doing the seismic now to protect the units to gain the benefit of a unit that within 4 years will be worth a couple hundred thousand dollars and paid for and tweak a couple of things the sprinkler requirements particularly there's going to be a future

sprinkler ordinance for agreement buildings clean up that up and the other issue to make that cost effective to the heat that is tied into the building electrical system for solar thank you. >> are there oh one more speaker come on up. >> hello, i'm here in favor of this legislation it is a unique piece of legislation that will benefit landlords and tenant currently involved in two projects one is also it may or may not retrofit it works well, for both of them the address unit will offset the costs of retrofit and it is going to compel the property owner to

help the building to do the retrofit that works well for the tenant it provides safe housing that is code compliant with an additional unit and the city will know about the rents and so i think it really works for all parties involved. >> thank you very much is there any public testimony okay seeing none, public comment is closed. >> supervisor wiener. >> i know the question came up i want to make a few comments thank you to the members of the public that came out to support the legislation first of all we have over a number of months received a number of expressions of interests from building owners that want to utilize the legislation and thank you to the

department of building inspection for novelist the members of the public that the legislation is in process, of course they can't guarantee anything will pass but people that want to utilize it can wait a little bit and do so in addition the substantive points about the building code are and other codes are important we know that project of within the zoning it gets caught up with building issues since those unite can't comply with 2014 bladz that's why it is important that the dbi is coming up with the equivalencies the first unit under the castro legislation came out of the planning department was approved by the planning we're exciting

it got catch up in terms of the code compliance but has been removed this is you know going to be a little bit of a process early on i am confident that dbi will iron out the issues within the process thank you. >> thank you very much supervisor kim. >> i had a couple of questions actually in relation i thought the council meeting of community organization that made comments on the legislation there was on 3 pieces one is there a monitoring piece of legislation. >> through the chair one of the amendments we're offering today repeal cats the monitoring provision that we put into the castro legislation periodic reporting required reporting about the rents so we can get

the acceptance of affordability so if mandated that will be in there. >> that's important i support us thinking of creative ways to add the units to the housing stock i'm occurs not only this legislation particular but all our legislation around the accessory dwelling units for the past supervisor chiu's legislation or in the castro and this one what impact it has on the dwelling unit and what prices are they rented at what afternoon income has this been targeting in practices and two other points i'm curious when i wanted to understand a little bit - so i doesn't see the differences between the chiu legislation and supervisor wiener for the castro versus the in-law unitsful in general the

subdivision in lots supplied prohibition it's my understanding through supervisor david chiu's legislation if you opted into the legislation and legalize our in-law units you'll be prohibited from selling it as a separate unite that was not done in the case of the castro the castro ordinance which i do not i'm trying to understand what type of units what kind of buildings this legislation will combating impact because i think that supervisor david chiu's - will this catch up a or cast a larger net than that. >> i can respond and, yes this will definitely apply to multi buildings and analytic the

buildings in retrofit it will be multi unit buildings the soft story retrofit is 5 or more or 3 stories or higher although you could see a 3 story building this is not common so typically be multi unit building. >> i have a map of which buildings this applies to i'll put it on the - >> that would be great i saw it in the handout it was black and white so not clear sfgovtv can we get even though overhead. >> there or will there be single-family homes in supervisor wiener ordinance that is not supervisor david chiu's ordinance. >> the soft story program applies to the believes that

have 5 unit or more not single-family home. >> this applies to voluntary retrofit you could have a 3 soft story that will be able to participate that is retrofitted specific in the code el else where so non-mandatory can participate. >> the nexus is to increase the housing stock that remain a rental unit i understand the complication if you're talking about units or more i wonder if there's a way to i think that supervisor

david chiu's former legislation are not prohibited from condoizing and some are i think there should be clarity and one set of rules for single-family homes. >> so president chiu's legislation there's a distinction the units covered by president chiu's legislation those are long term units that tenant in them we're talking about here in the castro legislation trying to incentivize owners to go through the many steps of actively building a brand new unit this is not about taking an existing unit to get it up to code it could be expensive we're talking about things that are not a

living unit and turning it into a living unit i guess my approach is that the more restrictions that you put on when results less likely anyone is going to participate in it so when you look at especially a single-family home home there are few through a seismic retrofit but someone wants to turn their garage into 0 living unit i'll be honest i have spoken to a number of people that did this illegal or want to do this they'll want to convert the lower units to live in the lower unit they can't get up the stairs anymore so those situations are varied that i am

hesitant to say if you do this through the printed in the record process and so on and so forth your reward will be you'll be banned if the condo lottery that's my terms in responding to those. >> we have time before the board i want to understand but i appreciate supervisor wiener's point so maybe i can sit down to understand the universe of buildings a little bit better than and again, i understand for multi unit buildings this is a tough position for the multi use building i want to think about the balance of single-family homes and their ability to condo vices. >> through the chair one thing i'll mention that this

legislation does not apply to rh w one and the reason for that because there are so few single-family homes that going retrofit it didn't make sense single-family homes are not within the areas that are eligible for this zoning change. >> okay. >> i'll mention it if there are single-family dwellings that want to go through the arriving they should be rh2 because this legislation is not applying to rh1 so basically they have another existing legal route to add another unit again not many i guess standards will go

through. >> that's an important point if you're in a rh1 or rh2 zone you have the ability to add another unit and. >> that finally i'll say this is not only for supervisor wiener's ordinance i believe that ada should be 3rb9 from short-term rentals i have concerns about the planning department's ability to endorse a 90 day cap so the accessory dwelling unit will be short-term rental not adding to the housing stacking stock but i'll agree with supervisor wiener this is not one ordinance but something that is in place for adas they

should be prohibited from short-term rentals thank you. >> thank you very much so we've taken public comment on this item and last remarks. >> madam chair supervisors thank you for the questions i'll move to adopt the amendments i've described at the beginning of hearing. >> a motion to adopt the months ago we'll take that without objection. >> i'm sorry public comments. >> we've had public comment on item 2. >> and then i'll move that we forward item two as amended to the full board with a positive recommendation and seconded by supervisor jane kim that passes

unanimously. >> thank you colleagues. >> madam clerk please call item 3. >> item 3 is resolution approving on agreement for the unit with rain tree third street, llc for development poerptd p on third street. >> thank you very much on the item of both items three and four madam clerk do i call out three and four together. >> item 4 is an agreement to rent with the housing partners with 2001 through 021010 street. >> this is 0 opted a planning code for incentive to correct construct and maintain developments in the eastern dog patch those will provide 2 add

and 53 units of rental housing allows the project sponsor for exchange to enter into an agreement with the city all the units they be rentals for a period of thirty years for a reduction in impact fees we have kate connor to present on those 3 items kate would you like to present thank you very much good afternoon. >> good afternoon kate connor planning department staff you have a agreement with the agreement between the property owners and the city to restrict the new dwelling units for thirty years this agreement is prudent for planning code section and those are for the projects on 2151-third street and tennessee street this is for

structures on 3 lots and 6 story building with 74 off-street parking and 93 bilk parking spaces that has 22 one bedroom units and 35 two bedroom unit all were proposed unanimously on january the 51201 tennessee street is an don't guess of an office story building and construction of a 6 story floor building and 2 hundred and 5 did bilk spaces this this has a mix existing of 6 bedroom units and one hundred and 5 two bedroom unit unit and 99 studio units all of the unit were approved by

the planning commission on may 1st, 2015 planning code section within the zoning district that the developer enters into an agreement to restrict the recommend for thirty years reduction of thirty percent in the amount of one dollar square feet only one other took advantage of those that concludes my presentation. >> colleagues i have representatives from rain tree and a i g with that are the property owners supervisor wiener. >> that was from green before. >> supervisor jane kim i want to appreciate you talking to me

before this item i want to clarify for the public when i read this agreement over the weekend i was a little bit surprised to learn during the process a piece of the plan that loud the developers to reduce their inclusionary program for the insensitivetion of the neighborhood i wasn't around then but in today's market we don't have to provide any incentives for the building directors to build i hope you explain for the sake of the public a little bit of the backyard u background how this got put into place and if this envelope incentive was important why cover the m m u rather than

the eastern block of the neighborhoods. >> those are neighborhoods area was identified between within the targeting area this district was m-1 or m two industrial zoning districts that will to the permit housing to be developed to counter act the plan for the sustainable all the percentages were much higher within the incentives there was inclusionary housing development and a couple of all of the elements the city land dedication and middle-income and the rental provision so this provision was adapted in 2008 and we've seen an increase in rental housing this agreement will restrict it for thirty years this sort of it didn't maternity what south of market did but will maintain that for

years. >> it answers my question i'll ask you a followup question in today's market we talked about the pdr because housing market is so hot right now people prefer to build office and residential i'm curious what role that topic will incentivize the industrial area. >> i'll not speak directly to how that aligns but this is the industrial district that permits the mixed use and housing. >> a one percent increase in its obligation to build affordable housing would consider a significant increase in relation to the lower cost of land.

>> right the increase requirements both of those parcels had a 16 percent requirement that was after the prop c reduction so in many zoning districts in the city are looking at a 12 percent requirement we already had the 16 by taking advantage of the further reduction. >> in relation to the eastern neighborhoods those development will be goibl for the 20 percent reduction regardless of whether or not this mechanism existed. >> that 20 percent reduction was applied to this district. >> you know i'll be supporting those items today but i hope as we look at the eastern neighborhood we're hitting the 5 market plan i want to incentivize it is