And so if the cus are wrapped into the lp a the cu goes to the board of appeals. Correct. I think ive heard a desire to keep the process as is doesnt mean this is no a plat for administrative sdrooil but sdrooil but from the board of supervisors to the board of appeals will be continuous and moving on to rent controls this still i know supervisor breed amendment there is still a provision in here for replacement units both local and state Bonus Program not allowed to demolition or convert why include the next forgave. Thanks for the link afternoon together youre looking at the piece i hundreds to you the Conner Johnson shared it the state of requires the replacements of units so youre looking at one felt programs individually requested withholding affordable well have that replacement requirement. One time. 100 percent this says local and state. Thats a great question we can get a revised language of conors version were striving through the replacement you cant demolish a rentcontrolled unit i apologize weve think working closely with sxooepd City Attorneys and the Mayors Office to get this language really right. I think through the confusion your packets didnt get the update and ive heard complains what we pocket into the next legislation that helps clarify the ambiguity. Im appreciative of the work that staff is doing this is an issue since we met wherever the first time it is frustrating not to get the right piece of paper and have questions about whether or not reversal is good next issue on so theres one sud that is taken utilities called the north beach sud it refers to something call avenue Incentive Program i feel like if there is another Different Program if this pathway exists i suggest a number of neighborhoods facing gentrification and ill name tenderloin and chinatown and western edition and excelsior and hayes valley that is not at the top of list but feel like if there is one exemption what is special about the north beach that is different than the other neighborhoods. I think thats my comment for now i want to ill see what my fellow commissioners have to say. Commissioner moore. Im really trying to the more i spends dedicating here at a time to this particular profile the more sxhufd i get it is still last august to say the least i was open to a broad based approach but the more i heard about that the mover it shifts away my confidence that this was really something we can constructively layer that slowly convinces the groups that were meeting to come to terms and find themselves on another aspect how it was present which were asked and answered to the repeated listening to peoples comments and Unanswered Questions i remain as large as number of truly unresolved issues with a certain amount of uneasiness that is not possible many people told me it was a onesizefitsall presentation and i couldnt say that request conviction ive heard it several times i have heard that repeated questions asked in other neighborhoods with a slightly different plan and it will be roefdz and really no primitive way of answering those questions and there was continued a. M. Inputs im reporting im here to listen to what people are asking me and staying the credits fire of that difficu dialogue it is too much more but few and two the for the many as much id like this to work and such as i feel the fire under my butt it just seems like im spending more and more time my pile of letters and rubltsz it is hire a their people that are bringing facts to the tackle ive not heard adversarial shared im sitting here to do something i dont have all the information at the time i need it including the more open discussion with supervisor breed about what really protection of the rentcontrolled unit means i dont feel i have have that confidence is it really an incentive for market rate housing is that because of the all right existing overproduction of market rate housing and the under production of Affordable Housing that were trying to resolve yet were grandfathering in this the bam thats the most amazing part to me moving forward with similar assumptions where i personally see myself not being 45 anywhere slipping slowly into that income category where i feeling where dont i fit if im quite nervous when i hear the numbers theyre not better that is working for me, the numbers are more and more to what i end up probably having to destine myself into the lower income bracket of people that will be looking for this kind of housing im using as an example to speak about myself standing the crossfire the legislation at this time i feel the questions are learn the answers and the tools given to me i have a big issue with Historic Preservation commission and take it from the top not necessarily the order of priorities and lock orders im strong with liveability with respect to what were building but those who will be effected by the building and people that will be living next to buildings where the answers have not yielded been addressed and the location and density and equality we only talking about rh3 and the districts they have already an awareness as commission you spoke about certain parts of city have qualified to be exempt we also heard that in particular direction very particular sites and properties have been pulled out there is racial inequality where the most impacts will be and ultimate im concerned that the Commission Authority and oversight is diminished and not clarified as to the extent i can sit here and vote while you rely on us. Commissioner hillis. Thank you for everybody who has testified and its been enlightening i think this is certainly worst the effort it is complicated but every week, we face the question to to build more Affordable Housing and the status quo is 12 percent inclusionary housing we ask started again but 12 percent go inclusionary housing and thats not working for anyone so we have challenged staff to come up with ways to increase the amount of Affordable Housing we built in the city i appreciate this came from that challenge to come up with ideas to generate more Affordable Housing in weve looked at you know we should encourage 100 percent Affordable Housing projects and protecting rent control you know eliminating the ellis act and building higher percentage of the clvrgs is important we know that and the broader city elected officials are looking at percentage but the most aggressive proposals im here is 25 inclusionary and the question that the 25 percent pass the 18 or whatever ends up will adjust as a result of that so you know gets kicked done the road thats a question we need to address the idea a simple obviously did details are complicated but we have questions about what the im should be and in exchange including more housing to be billion built and certainly this raise questions it didnt work onesizefitsall approach it works better on a gas station on 19th avenue and geary and 19th street or vacate lots an lombard or wheel lands avenue in Visitacion Valley are a barky think dwoirth so we have to get at that and figure out how we get into more detail onesizefitsall approach and maybe a gone story and kind of our more narrow commercial with a lower percent or two stories and some of the thirty percent i dont know but we have to get at that question it is worth continuing rent control this commission was where i worked before we said rent control we shouldnt allow this to happen where rentcontrolled unit are being down the road and the commission agreed the last time supervisor president london breeds legislation we say we so what even the indents program you that is contrary the we think is ami levels where did we come up with the one 40 the one 20 was used why did we settle the 3 person household at within 40 that could be two individuals with a child the affordable is 518 were above were building you know were over spilled were building for one 40 but i dont think that exists so why not one 60 why not one 20 give us your thought why that level. Kristen Department Staff if i could have the overhead or laptop we did the work would the mayor to think about what they mean by middleincome and the bonds work up to one 50 we worked with the counsels talking with people with the inclusionary housing people that are looking for housing through the Mayors Office and as you can see on the slides youll see is income levels the one 20 and one 40 for a single permanent households or a 5 person households the very low were serve with inclusionary were having technical difficulty and as you can see on this slide over middleincome household a one person household can afford by afford spent thirty percent of their income and the market rate housing is 3 thousand 4 hundred so theyre not able to afford a home the same analysis to the right for a 3 percent parents and child 8 thousand and it is unreach able to our point the income group we dont have yes commenters are correct the market is the not serving we vice chair, have lots of conversations what are redrying to do what were serving. A various by neighborhoods you know value of housing or the marketrate of housing it various widely i dont know if it makes sense at some point to adjust those by neighborhoods because unifying obviously it as 3 person household four discounts if youre downtown along with the waterfront and if in the europe sunset i dont think there is ways to do that. We have thought about that we were concerned about what happens when the market goes down we are offering one 40 their subsidize and when the invoice so theyre required to do a market study blow ami in blow the Neighborhood Market the Neighborhood Market is low and the one 40 is matching were required to do the middleincome markets gone o 20 percent blow that. The 20 percent business issue is complicated you know, i think we started with protecting the legacy businesses and certainly im not interested in you know giving k f c a relocation sups but somehow bridging that between the legacy business and a bank are Title Company not interested and its a complicated issue exist law didnt protect that one story can be a lease can be termed terminated under the new program so it get complicated but thinking on more the best ways to protect Small Businesses that would be helpful and on the cu kind of approval given the concern and given some sites might work why not continue if you need a cu now you he had on a a cu you know what im saying ill roll over what the existing approval process is into this because i think there are challenges there are some sites might not work you might not fit the level of density so i generally think this is heading in the right direction is needs to go nor nuance but i know you took staff recommended continuing if we do i want to see the same level of effort and Community Involvement to groups you know starting to tease those issues out so thank you. I wanted to mention theres some very nice comments by the public and it is kind of difficult i identify and completely understand people that are deadly opposed and identify with people that are supportive this is part of San Francisco the unique blend and the variety of income level of folks one commenter struck to me i dont know if he supported or opposed but what makes San Francisco are the people of San Francisco what use to be multi generational the old joke how do you know on old san franciscan they ask where your fabricate went to high school were losing that i dont know if we will gain that back but the city is changing commissioner antonini is rights population is growing well be bigger and well be more folks i believe that ties into prauchl we talked about the 3 legged stool in housing there is certainly were out of the chalk maybe some things not in our control i wanted to again point out it is a reigning implication were in a position i think to lead that communication so some observations that strike me i did not hear anyone from the bayview it is the most impacted sorry thank you. One there was one okay. Not many but if you look at the dotted map that is highly impacts but the idea were maybe be exempting some districts kind of rubs me wrong it is difficult to make those kind of citywide overarching policies and decisions what makes San Francisco unique is that it is a you know you have to weve sat up here for years every single case is different address by address their unique what is next door is different next door to that it is difficult but want to be supportive the things id like to see thought about kicked around between now and the next meeting no demolition of rentcontrolled unit id like to learn more about the 320 and pretty close to our process now id like to explore and maybe hear offline or online any demolition of units looked at and district exemptions what makes that district special versus another one but ill leave it the worst thing we can do is nothing of we approve this program it is water down the worst thing for San Francisco not build any more housing in my opinion commissioner Vice President richards. So i have 13 pages of notes it will be awhile seriously first of all, i feel like tonight it is not 11 oclock shortterm rentals it is not the closet things we cut off a 10 cancel and another one wraps us around the next but in september prior to that it was to be funny it was in the summer but one wields things mentioning the experience and tonights at that point, we had the same potential for voter potential owners we dont tonight as well and initiatives entered and it is the same feeling of impact what are we are doing this for this might be history in 3 or 6 months i want to put that out there first mother of all questions for the City Attorney i weve heard from mr. Welch were in compliance and someone can someone comment on that about the state law. Curious stone we were talking about the Housing Element with the mcd that calvin brought up a document claim we are in fact, in compliance with the Housing Element law thereer details into the approvals and mcd was the the requirement we complete an ordinance implementing the state density allow ill provide that documentation at the next meeting. Second question then would be second mother of all issues is rent control im seeing the new supervisor breed amendment that talks about signs affidavit the form of a acceptable form their subject to the rent control the question i have on that if i have a building and it was built in 1910 and 4 units and he 6 years ago i ellis acted it and now applying for the states density bonus 5 year period and my belief is not under rent control it was 4 units built in 1910 it will be rentcontrolled unit and it follows the building as long as it is standing regardless if youre in and out of business is that the case . No i was going to say im i know enough about rent control to be dangerous so i want to say the intents of that which is to certifies close the door on a loophole your imagining so someone ellis acted theyre building and use this program so the idea of that time lag to greatly disincentivizes and prevent that so my thought ellis act never altered to create the disincentives creates the loopholes the legislation this did not demolish remove i think the word should be prohibits the words versus it is kind of a work in process and keep going down the list here. The whole issue lets talk about Historic Preservation i have photos i took when i talked u walked around noah valley ill walk you through there it are numbered 1, 2, 3 and mr. Butler Pay Attention ill ask your thoughts so number one a fuel view last thursday we approved the demolition of a singlefamily home in the 24th street mcd . Especially for if i friends in noah valley pros and cons to protect noah charms we got a flood of emails to is a see we approved the demolition if you lift this up it says 24th street i know pa a no density bonus was kwaed the developer was going to demolish this above the garage the notification created 5 units in this site i walked home and the church the basement of the church ill look at 24th street and the reason im concerned i looked at mr. Kellys description of where this house sits no Historic District so i can see those addresses all had significant work done but it passed they were not historic so this is the storefront but the details and the one above is altered like the one demolished go do page 2 the same block 4 is thank you very much oh, okay. Thats what we approved and so i wanted 0 people probation officer realize under the Current Program an incentive to demolition the buildings to make a profit and we approved that that building i think that was unanimous and reduced it a little bit so the house is not there page 3 please so furthers down the block we have those hours singlefamily homes addresses again and according to the addendum the eir talking about Historic Preservation commission and the staff report only identified Historic Resources will not be demolished the definition was recurs labeled code a the system in our Planning System so 4143 is a g and theyre all b ill walk into the planning information counter and hand in my permit what happens walk me through. Tim frye with the San Francisco planning some sorts of historic planning to determine whether or not it is a Historic Building for the sake of ceqa so it necessitates some rectify category a it is, in fact, a resource so whether the project sponsor prepares their own information or we use the Planning Dep