Any announcements . Yes. Completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. Items acted upon today will appear on the september 27th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Great, thank you thank you. Can you call item one. Ordinance for the planning code for the rezoning ever midtown from the designated designation as residential house, one family to residential house attached detrimentally. The zoning map for lot number 8 from the designation as public to rh1 thank you supervisor yee is joined us hes the sponsor of the item and lead the discussion did i welcome supervisor yee. Thank you chair cohen and thank you for having this item before you you today the Midtown TerraceHomeowners Association over a year ago talked about the incorrect zoning in the neighborhood current was zoned as rh1 the homes are detached and fit rhd1 and we encourage the association to conduct comprehensive issues to make sure the zoning amendment r amend was agreeable after month long outreach the association was ready to move forward with a request the Planning Department and the commission unanimously support the decision to correct the zoning of this neighborhood so today, i hope youll support the request to rectify to accountant the midtown and the retain detached homes thank you very much and. I have a number of speakers a staff presentation supervisor yee. Oh, welcome. Good afternoon, supervisors aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. This fits the zoning map error by the singlefamily homes homes public and this changes that to rhd1 the different between rh1 and rhd1 that allows the setback of 25 feet and wider and one unit in a lot area with the conditional use authorization rhd1 for one unit no matter how large the lots theirs excluded the properties have the rh1 with the program the Planning Commission heard this and voted to recommend approving the proposed ordinance it fits within the rhd1 district because the neighborhood was developed as a singlefamily Dwelling Development with single detached homes the Commission Found the zoning towards the frontage will eliminate the possibility of two unit per lot with more than 6 thousand square feet and 28 property are 38 percent to take advantage and finally, the Commission Found there was significant support and that concludes my remarks ill be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you for your remarks supervisor yee any other questions. Supervisor wiener. Thank you very much so regarding this legislation weve received quite a bit of Community Feedback the only question in terms of whether homes are detached or not and rh1 or rhd1 for deattached is not the main issue right now before rh1 or rhd1 singlefamily home i know for a long, long number of lots the issue of 3 thousand square feet that impacts almost no lots the bigger issue is around a recent adopted accessary dwelling legislation that supervisor peskin had offered a verse and supervisor farrell and i offered a version and moving forward with harmony and in that legislation rhd1 is not covered whereas, rh1 is so right now as we sit here today Midtown Terrace was included in the accessary dwellings legislation if it is rezoned as rhd1 i dont have an issue with it would take mid town terrace out of the accessary dwelling legislation thats a concern that i have i understand that in the legislation we adopted it references rhd1 the state accessary dwelling legislation i believe and says it applies, of course, it applies for the stuart local law regardless of what we said my understanding please for the Planning Department correct me if i am wrong i dont believe any accessary dwelling has ever been permitted in other 125i9 aau law. Youre right not that i know of any proposed under status and not entirely sure how to permitted those but working on those now because of ordinance. I believe the adu laws has been in effect in 30 or 35 years. Since 1980 and zero permitted under that measure and Planning Department sitting here is not sure how that works as we have legislation that that board a 10 to one vote passed that creates a process building on local legislation throughout the adus youll be interested in i have ill read this now and will be an oral amendment to address that issue and basically mroudz provides the rezoning district from rh1 and rhd1 will not impact the applicablely accessary dwelling legislation but will provide this neighborhood with what it is seeking based on the emails im concerned received to preserve the side setbacks and for people not following that adu a long widening pathway this provides for owning an existing envelope ill read for all lots proposed to be zoned from rh1 to rhd1 the prohibition of all day long an accessary dwelling is for this and apply that allows for the rezoning of rhd1 to maintain the setback with side setbacks rirmentsdz but maintain fully intact the local allowance for accessary dwellings that currently applies in the town terrace to maintain todays status quo for adus in the town terrace so thats an amendment i would to put on the floor and listen to Public Comment and discuss other things. Thank you, supervisor wiener. Supervisor peskin to supervisor wiener this may be 6 and onehalf a do so of the other the state provisions not with standing i guess two things popped to mind first of all, i do believe that you are one of the authors or coauthors of the legislation that was put on the ballot and we worked out in the chambers that actually created the rhd1 expectation to interesting enough the two competing piece of legislation one that covered rhd1 with adus and you are the author i believe or coauthor of the piece of legislation that ended up we marked them with the provision that says controls on construction that is accessary dwelling in the rhd1 shall be modify bids the california government code so, i mean if this is your policy rational relative to adus im not sure why something that is being i dont want to say rezoned district as the proper zoning nomenclature it 14 have been rhd1 ultimately i dont care i was those the other side of adus i wanted them citywide but didnt matter of political and Community Protocol as far as it is the Midtown Terrace association that brought this to the District Supervisor ill ultimately defer to what the association that has been through this year along process and gotten an unanimous decision wants and the districts supervisor that represents them wants but doesnt matter. Through the chair absolutely im concerned had a Good Relationship with the rhd1 relationship im respectful of those working relationships how have this is different this is expanding existing rhd1 neighborhood and an argument should have been zoned many decades ago it was not and zoned rh1 i was willing in terms of the existing rhd1 neighborhoods were 20 percent of the overall Housing Stock to work with the neighborhoods but have concerns about expanding the adu local prohibition i understand your point but think this you know with respect my perspective is a reasonable one thank you. Supervisor yee. Yes. What i like to do supervisor wieners is to give time for me to look at your amendment language that youre proposing i understand the concept and the argument that again, this is something that is a correction was always buildings have not changed theyre pretty much an rhd1 im going to be open to our amendment but need time i want to go back when i worked with the Midtown Terrace association they did a good job in reaching out to people to say ask them do you want your supervisor to work and pretty much was a yes to allow for them i want to allow them to make the decision but this is difficult to just make an amendment today and i think that we reach out to the residents and the on problem with this one can make the argument in one of these Neighborhood Associations zoned rhd1 hey this changes this changing for us and so thats opening the door in the other direction there is a possibility that well start seeing that will be inconsistent throughout the city in terms of what were saying and depend on what category may be different thats the danger of what were representing. Supervisor wiener. Through the chair i appreciate that and i will continue the dialogue on this i guess you know in the end this is about not down zoning in terms of the and the existing that neighborhoods where adus and sitting here accessary dwellings new ones are allowed in the mid town terrace i have a concern taking that away im concerned received a number of emails from the Midtown Terrace the jest of the emails is fairly consistent about the side sergeants and the concern a goodsized singlefamily home will be turned into a bigger singlefamily that Property Line to Property Line instead of the setback thats the concern i read xresdz in the emails and the rezoning with the circulation this is not taking away the existing adu allowance i think that accomplishes what i seen in the numerous emails but look forward to the Public Comment. All right. With that said go ahead and go to Public Comment ladies and gentlemen, two minutes to speak youll hear a soft chime a reminder you have thirty seconds remaining i have a stack of cards ill call names calling names . David you can start. My name is david a 9 year resident of Midtown Terrace and former member of the hoefrmz association and one of the preliminary proponents of this action our neighborhood is primarily interested in preserving the character of the neighborhood and found in the recent years a threat a number of applications coming through recently that have Property Development not Property Line and on the Planning Department and said we oppose this they said our hands are tied those applications are meeting the zoning designation so that was our impuss he and your primary impetus and say that note an issue on the adu not a part of plan to effect the adus in any way so i guess the only thing that i would say in your neighborhood is rhd1 then i will say we should apply the appropriate zoning and then apply the outlet regulations as they apply to the zoning, however, it is much more important to me that we chuch the protection of the detached character of the neighborhood than for me to argue if were under state or city regulations ive had conversations with the Planning Department with members of the Planning Department that are im told are experts and assured me that applications will be approved under the state adu regulations theyre working on how that will happen and whether or not they have the support so personally representing Midtown Terrace it is important to have an amendment thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, supervisors my name is rick president of the mid you town Terrace Homeowners Association wouldnt go back into the saurments theyve been eloquent want to assure you weve done extensive outreach our primary position to preserve the character of the neighborhood and one that goes every sunday to the all the open houses to make sure that the realtors know about the association i have to tell you they dont go to houses not having adu in the garage having said that, again as please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones, ma r mcadam said it is about the setbacks and the character of the neighborhood thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi, im joits lived in the Midtown Terrace since 1997 and i want to thank supervisor cowen and supervisor peskin and supervisor yee for supporting us and thank to supervisor wiener for thinking about this in terms of the legislation i think when we started it over two years ago and in the last year worked with supervisor yee to bring together the information that adu difference for our rh1 and rhd1 didnt exist at the time, we were putting this together and it was through supervisor wiener actually responding to any email that i became personally that will make a change and many of the homes in Midtown Terrace have inlaw units and no intention to stop them but the intuition to stop the construction for lot lines and logging our green space we want to retain our dwe attached character im perl very much in favor of the amendment in that again, when we started this no discussion about changing the freedoms of the homeowners with respect to adus and i think that is new legislation that you putdown before into zoning and caught us by surprise and really thank you for an ability to be flexible and think of a woo to help us with the rhd1 and still hell the owners and city with adus. Thank you i called up norm great and followed by calling names . If anyone else who i have not called please get in line thank you. Thank you, supervisors my name is norm and my husband and i have been over 25 years of mid town terrace and joined with the previous speakers in their arguments and to approve the proposal to correct our zoning i want to mention one word on the discussion on the potential amendment to the legislation i know supervisor yee probably has concerns if an amendment is and so forth there be a similar outreach to our community to make sure theyre still an agreement with that type of change and as one of the people that went dooerd to ma changes im willing and anticipating the difficulty it might be to explain the nuances of that type of distinction between what we will be zoned rhd1 as opposed to to allowing the exemption to the adu program ill suggest that you might take into account substance what difference the type of adu program under the state how if it is more restrictive or less restrictive than the citys program and substantively not that much different ill urge you to see if the rezoning can occur and denominator that amendment is necessary and thank you for your time in looking at this and wanted to express my presentation to supervisor yee for this to get to the point where were at today thank you very much. Thank you next speaker. Good afternoon, supervisors i think that Midtown Terrace should be an rhd1 i also would like to mention that i dont see at this time a need for an amendment to accomplish you did a great job on one six 2, 16 and state law that is an accessary dwelling in an rhd1 Zone District shall be loudly on mandated by a ordnance of the california government code basically this is a standard second units that include that are not limited to parking, height and setback and lot coverage and architectural review and maximum size of units and the adverse impacts on any Real Property listed in the california registration of Historic Places given that i feel there is no need for on amendment the supervisors had a chance to put those two opposing pieces of legislation and came up with one rhd1 separate that is fine the city and community shall allow us to tie in our rhd1 but given the state law and the reference for the state law no reason for an amendment at this time thank you very much. Great, thank you. Next speaker good afternoon, supervisors thank you for your work im gordon and been a resident a native san franciscan and been a resident of midtown since 1987 and in 1984 thanks to the health of my parents my husband and i bought a home i just im going to repeat would everyone has spoken about i think that is clear that the neighborhood want this zoning correction made i dont want to see it delayed whether or not it is an amendment tonight or today and gets approved forthwith the issue of the adu is really secondary to the issue of maintaining a neighborhood and nipping in the bud any application to have to fight people are not clever enough to see how to expand their homes without impinging on peoples you privacy tell you that needs to be focused this is about continuing the rh1 character and the ada is an issue not important enough to delay this i spoke briefing with any friend of mine john rahaim and said thats an issue with the adus is not a problem so im speaking this is not the right thing we need to get the zoning corrected and fixed and avoid people going to the Building Department and use the plan checkers time for the building mcmansions on the relatively few lots i want to thank the Homeowners Group im concerned not been active but feel horrible were getting our 15 thank you. Next speaker. calling names . Hi, im dana renter in the city and want to say that you should oppose this zoning the reason i want to see that because i look at the website and the main reason people are proposing they say the existing zoning will lower the Property Values in case youve lived under a rocky want you to remember the medium home value is one million basically 90 percent of the residents cant afford so what well be doing by down voting this ethic basically, lets wait for the hyper valuable urban space so for the benefit of a few rich landowners at the expense of renters who are disproportionately young and less wealthy im disappointed to see none in the room none from the Affordable Housing activists from low income like the mission or the bayview they normally show up to oppose the new marketrate housing in their own neighborhood they say the rich should live somewhere else this is rich with high Property Values and in so doing on up zoning for more housing to get built and absorb some of the people putting the pressure on the gentrification we have a down zoning and making it hard to have the pressures on protecting communitie