two items. >> thank you, supervisor kim. >> supervisor cowen supervisor wiener thank you very much my name is shawn heart the transbay project manager with the office of citizen complaints i have a brief presentation i'm going to present both block 5 and block 8 at the same time start with block 5 at howard and beale streets this map shows the parcels that involved the larger parcel is n one and that is the parcel that will actually be sold to m a west which is the developer other two parcels are open space

parcels next slide is a rendering of the average office building i'll talk about that more in a minute purchase price is one hundred 72 millions the proceeds go towards the construction of the transit center and in 2016 the project consists of 7 hundred and 66 thousand seven hundred square feet of office space and to restore the tower there is 86 hundred square feet of ground floor retail space and about 24 thousand square feet of public open space the plan to start construction in 2016 and required to complete the construction within 39 months of commencement as supervisor kim mentioned the

developer will pay the impact fees of 6 point plus million dollars and $11 million plain clothes 8 is located on fulsome street between first and fremont this is a rendering of the building this one is residential and it consists of tower building plus two podiums located adjacent east this is a site the purchase price is $71 million again the funds are towards the construction and the close date is october 1st of 2016 for total units of which 4 hundred and 4 market rate that are split into the for sale and rentals there will be hundred 50 affordable units of which 70

where are inclusionary are developer funded and will be affordable to households up to 40 and 50 percent of ami and the other 80 affordable units will be funded by and affordable for households up to 50 percent of ami and 65 hundred square feet of open space they will start construction in december of 2016 and must complete within 42 months of commencement if you have any questions i have developer reps here. >> thank you very much for your presentation. >> quick and to the point. >> supervisor kim i don't know if you have any rarmz remarks seeing none public comment for items three and four any public comment on this item? please come up to the podium you

have two minutes seeing none, public comment is closed at this time supervisor kim. >> so i'd like to make a motion to move forward items three and four i move we send it to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> we'll take that without objection. that motion passes with a positive recommendation madam clerk please call item number 5 and 6 together. >> yes. item 5 is an ordinance amending the construction of a accessory dwelling units in district 58 and the dwelling units in district 3. >> and she is the author of item 57 and supervisor christensen is the author of item number 6 i first recognize supervisor wiener. >> thank you very much madam chair it is a great to be here today

with the legislation which is the third piece of legislation around increasing in-law units that i've authored in the last year and which captains the work we've previously done and i want to thank supervisor christensen for xandz this concept into district 3 and it is terrific to see more parts of city be able to assess this important kind of housing so, of course colleagues as we know our housing crisis will require a number of approaches to address it and i won't glow a laundry list of a lot of things we do only one piece of the puzzle allowing people to add in-law units and accessory in-law units into our existing building whether a

single-family home or space in a multi unit building not currently used for residential purposes we have a lot of unused space in believes in various parts of city not currently used for residential purposes but that could be a garage or a shortage area or a basement that is partially above ground this legislation builds on the castro in law legislation i offered last year and this board passed unanimously and the service legislation i offered this year that allowed the in law units with retroactively retrofit and captains the entirety to the district i represent district 8 including for the creation of must rental units if it is adams into an existing rermentd

building the castro legislation we passed last year support from the castro eureka area and the bay area recordeder and the lgbt democratic club and spur and the legislation before us that expands to the rest of the district is endorses by the board of supervisors and the park association and the dined or diamond heights community association we know that our city has been growing and continues to grow san francisco is growing by 10 thousand people a year and our housing creation had a has not kept up we need to find ways to create moyer's for a growing population we know that in-law units are the most affordable kind of non-incentivized housing we according to various studies by hud and berkley and aarp they

end to be smaller on the ground floor they're not because of built into existing buildings not finished with the construction first and foremost the infrastructure is in place and needs to be extended into the new units the units are more affordable and assessable for seniors for people with mobility challenges thereby typically on the ground floor they inhollering desnefld so the impacts from a neighborhoods are not significant you'll have a union here and there and spread out so the controls or the proposal here for the remainder is the same that we pass in the castro one in-law unit for any building

currently up to 10 units and greater than 10 unit must be constructed within the. >> next speaker, please. >> envelope and using the space not used for residential purposes as nodded if a building is subject to rent control i'll be howard to have your support and i'll now defer to supervisor christensen. >> thank you supervisor christensen welcome. >> thank you. i'm grateful to supervisor wiener for spearheading a lot of the effort in district 8 there are a lot of us feel if it is time we're certainly at a situation in the housing for my district where we have some of the oldest neighborhoods in the city and the most densely built in san francisco this is a way to do our part to try to add more

housing to the housing stock this is called in-law unit legislation in a lot of cases we have a large percentage of our population that is living in buildings with units 10 units or more and a lot of 20 or thirty or 40 unit buildings many of which are 21st century and mechanical not needed for the purposes we'll have interest from building owners in being able to not expand the existing units but allow for units i was drawn to this as one solution to our housing situation it it preserves the character of our neighborhoods by not expanding the exterior envelope as supervisor wiener said there is a large dispermeation of housing the fact that the units are marry likely to be assessable to

seniors and those with mobility issues and since my district 95 percent of the buildings in district 3 were built between 1979 a high probability that any of the new apartments will be rent controlled i think the fact we can do this without can only implying the housing is great i'm delighted to join this towards one more solution and very much hope we can see this through thank you. >> thank you very much colleagues? >> supervisor wiener supervisor christensen any other staff presentations no let's take public comment. >> i'm sorry looks like there's the planning department is here. >> i'm patrick. >> hold on i'm going to let the

planning commission make a short presentation on the legislation then we'll call you up. >> good afternoon, supervisors from planning commission heard this item on july 16th i recommended support of this legislation that adu's are pragmatic inform strategy for housing they will added to existing buildings that are developed and not likely to be redevelopment and therefore allow more efficient uses of the area for the city to provide more housing and allows additional rental housing on the math of the city that don't have high contamination the city recommended the number of adu's allowed marry unit and the

prevail ordinances are aligned except the number of adu's lot and it is recommend that district 8 be amend to the numbers align with the proposal in district 8 similar to what is allowed in the castro one adu in buildings of 10 units or less and only 2 adu's for larger buildings more than 10 units and in district 3 the service retrofits adu project one adu is allowed for buildings for 4 units or less and large sized buildings there is no cap on the number of adu's employed so the commission found that strategy is more aligned with the departments strategy in terms of controlling density which is more using

formula related factors like open space requirements and similarly in this legislation there are form related factors for adu's they need to be living and existing built envelope and can't use space on residential units commission recommended that to use the same strategy so for district 8 the recommendation would be one adu for buildings of four units or less and no cap on the number for large sized buildings i'm here for any other questions. >> thank you for being here for questions supervisor kim has a view. >> it is specifically on what you stated it was confusing in the report they should be

consistent between items five and six as well the district 8 what was ovrj recommended previously one adu for you said building every 10 units and under. >> yes. >> and two unit for 10 unit and above. >> uh-huh. >> district 3 what is proposed what the planning commission is recommending one unit for building 4 unit and below and unlimited ray. >> yes. >> but rejected to the density. >> it is - >> as rent controlled. >> to four controls to the fact the unit has to be within the existing building envelope and not take space for any of the existing rental units. >> i know you spoke why did the commission feel this was more consistent. >> it is more aligned with what the city does in mixed use areas

of the city that have no density controls in terms of number of units per lot and per persons for the lot for example, the m m u for mixed use zoning district and mc d districts so basically the number of units that can be built is only controlled by frrmd like high bulk sarah limits and open space requirements so also 5 units in terms of bedrooms this is i understand with that so we have formulated controls and we can get more efficient use of areas unused areas in the building as long as the - builds form of the

building is not changed. >> i understand. >> this may be a difficult question to answer i see a long line of comments so i want to hear from the public maybe i'll ask for requests after there a lot of parcels you anticipate believes that are eligible to build more than 2 assessable units in district 3 it seems unlikely i was curious. >> we've not done the nauflsz but the environmental impact report there was 10 percent of the buildings eligible can act with two units. >> in the legislation that is before us is interest a provision on monitoring requirements to see how those programs are going. >> correct there's a monitoring program in the code for all adu's so the

intention of that program to for the validity of adu's for the new adu's to be subject to the same monitoring program the planning department can request the rent amount for those units so that if there recent some go affordability issues we can reconsider and take a look at the affordability. >> beyond the planning department be able to ask for the reasonable amount what else is in the monitoring program would you remind me and the members of the public. >> we're maintaining a master list of the units and the planning department can request rents and basically, what the result of the analysis of the rent for the units will be after we get a few of feeling then do an analysis of affordability and reconsider if there are another

solution. >> how frequently do you do this report and when does it come to the board. >> we haven't gotten that ma applications yet there is no threshold i think on how many. >> - >> on - so i see you're referring to form commissioner wu's on the assessabley affordable units is that what you're pricing to items five and six. >> in the separated ms. campbell plan is for the new adu's. >> within five and six or referring to previous legislation and previous legislation of legislation the castro. >> in supervisor wiener original originally was a trial or test i found in his district put in a monitoring program that will extend to items five and

six what was in the - it if say anything is that annual or two years or 3 years. >> i think that mentioned that one year after the adoption of the owners we haven't gotten adu built we're not - don't have enough information for an analysis. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor wiener. >> thank you just to clarify we had a long discussion on the planning commission to supervisor kim's question that the - in the district 8 - just to respond to supervisor kim's question this came up at planning commission in the district 8 legislation or excuse me. the castro legislation we passed last year either one or two unit limits so we supervisor

christensen took a slightly drift approach and the planning commission asked to amend the district 8 legislation to conform to district 3 but the quality of outreach was a one or two unit i'm a little bit that uncomfortable without doing the outreach i'm open for the future i have piano problem in terms of policy in terms of the monitor we did that into the castro that was extended to both piece of legislation several adu's have been approved in the castro i don't know any of them have building permits but not completed or rented out there is no rent to monitor at this time we'll see is it accelerate and monitoring occur once it becomes more more of a full universe of

units. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you at this time we'll have. >> thank you supervisor cohen. >> i'm speaking against the proposal to have unlimited adu's in district 3 i'm a resident of district 3 and based on media reports in which i recall supervisor christensen was asked what she would do to address the hockey's in san francisco she said we may have to have a conversation about rent control itself very worried about this current supervisor attempting to eliminate rent control in district 3 or elsewhere in the

city so i will be casting my vote come november for former supervisor aaron under the guys of anyone. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is a paul we were on behalf of the telegraph hill we're here primarily to ask for time we understand that this legislation was introduced in june and we first got wind of it loose monday a week ago today and we turned resources not only within telegraph hill but other neighborhood associations to see what we can put together for the planning commission and we went to the planning commission empty

handed and said we need more time where there is no outreach at least among a number of associations we contacted and so i'm here today to ask for the time and to commit that we'll provide resources to supervisor christensen to sit down with her staff and appropriate people within the city to work through our comments we submitted to committee today a letter from the telegraph hill dwellers a list of comments on the legislation and we want to emphasis that list is not only from telegraph hill dwellers but a number of associations both within district 3 and throughout the city which don't believe they've received any adequate outreach i'll mention a couple of them for give you an item number one as supervisor christensen pointed out there's a protection

against cannibalization for building units not a compatible one for businesses there should be we also, we wish to see a cap on the number of units within our envelope and further we don't believe there should be on street parking permits we'll have 7 hundred more cars on the street as a result of this legislation thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm jennifer with the san francisco tenants union the co-founder the anti vibration this is to preserve our rent control stocking stock, however as the balance report with the hundred plus units through the demolition and the conversion in

the last of affordable units r is worse the report didn't count the tenants that are forced out with evictions since 1979 i estimate 11 percent of the rental stock that qualified for rent control is ellis act or turned into condos so any rent control hours is commendable the legislation american disabilities act may be - how have we'll like shares that the units are kept as avenue i building you've expressed our support for rent controlled housing we should be in agreement therefore 3 proposed amendments that are especially important in order to sign on number one add a provision that adu's are rental unit and restrict their

conversions to individual resale and add provisions to prohibit of the adu's where attendance are forced out by ellis act or buy outs and number 3 add a provision to prohibit adu's for use of short-term rentals and finally prototype do rush the legislation but take the time to get it right thank you for your time we'll be watching how this unfolds. >> hi, i'm rep both senior and disability as well as the north beach action committee i'm here we didn't plan this but following jennifer is great those are the exact same meaningless i'd like to support and i know those of us factoring d and tenants are in supports of that i brought with mia couple

of examples of buildings where actually a couple have been forced out in 2000 the an illegal it in law was legalized and used a vacation rental along with age entire unit within the same building this is added new legal in law so that's exists this is a realty something that frightens us i'd hope you would be short to amend this to protect the housing so those can be available to others that it indeed be affordable and as well as there's another building 2005 it was withdrawn from the rental market the

people were evicted under the ellis act given permission to merge two unions into one and add ailed unit that is an airbnb that exists and hope you have those protections in place if we truly add affordable housing thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors my name is rob pool the housing action coalition we're here to support supervisor christensen's and supervisor wiener's legislation we've been talking about in-law units in san francisco for decades and there's this is as good as a time as any to get this going after all those years we've made progress and in-law units in the castro and 80 new handbooks it shows people what we can do in

neighborhoods with the nephew's and this is great keep moving forward that program should be expanded for the neighborhoods today those types of units are cheaper to build and neal more affordable and don't require thousands of dollars per units of subsidize and their don't effect the neighborhood character and sustainable that is one of any logical solutions to a severe housing shortage and housing crisis that we're facing that is, we should absolutely support and move to the full board. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> >> good afternoon, supervisors i'm betsy the president of the diamond heights communities association our association board supports the seary dwelling unit legislation for district 8 for two reasons the legislation would provide