Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    October 7, 2011 4:30am-5:00am PDT

4:30 am
-- several residents attend committee meetings. we had our share of detractors on this project. they are worried, which a think is the main concern, that such a place will somehow the grade he quality of life for neighbors. our experience to date has been the complete opposite. our neighborhood and neighbors' lives are enhanced by a well-run facility that adds an element of diversity of life experience and caring that solidifies our mutual commitment to building a better community. the community housing partnership is an excellent neighbor. they are sensitive and responsible to the concerns of neighbors and provide a much- needed service to those at the helm.
4:31 am
>> on behalf of san francisco housing action coalition. month ago, we reviewed this project and support it wholeheartedly. but we think that the neighborhood would be improved by putting this project, and san francisco as a logical would be improved if these types of projects were dispersed all over the city. we want to express our deep frustration that ceqa is a tool to try to hamstring projects, to try to stop them. it proves how broken it is as a tool for addressing the environmental challenges that the city faces. the very rare accident of the site of great developer and a great service provider occurring at the same place at time. it is hard to police projects. i want to say that as far as this appeal goes, we all know
4:32 am
that this discussion is about many things. the impact on the environment is not one of them. i have to say that the appeal of a project like this is reprehensible and i hope that you would not support it. >> i am the interim housing director at the vernal heights neighborhood center. if is a sister agency, we both have a true community-based approach for her affordable housing. they said the bar very high for the quality of its development. we look at it for the long run, for 55 years, the quality of construction and the operations to keep the housing stable.
4:33 am
among the colleagues and neighbors, as a leader in developing a very sophisticated and successful model of property management. the project is desperately needed to address the needs of transitional youth. the city is responsible for the funds. they will be incorporating the units into a project that we are in development for right now. it is important that all of the neighborhoods understand that we are really one city, one community. and we have a responsibility to take care of each other. i sought a t-shirt as i was sitting in the overflow room that said that the solution to homelessness is affordable housing. i would say high-quality affordable housing less affordable services is a
4:34 am
solution to homelessness and this project does just that. i urge your support. >> i am speaking on behalf -- everyone knows that we are not here because of anybody spreading passion for ceqa. [laughter] a very small group of people think that and the property of their value of their neighborhood will decline. the idea that one person can know anything about another person based on their gender, their sexual orientation, is something we call prejudice. the notion that it is a validation to determine who lives in what neighborhood is called segregation. and here we are.
4:35 am
if you bring all of our thinking into the twenty first century, this fades away. do you support use housing or to support you homelessness. i think you know everything that you -- that i have said right now and they will vote the right way. >> how're you doing, supervisors? i come from foster care, and i did not have anywhere to go. it was real hard. what they are trying to do with this, they want to support children coming from a foster home with housing, this is very vital.
4:36 am
it is real powerful and it would really help a lot in a positive way. a hope you take into consideration here. thank you. >> i live one block from the edward project -- also, i am familiar with the community housing building >> before
4:37 am
coming to this particular organization, i have worked with transitional youth. while working with the specific population of 12-24, i realize the importance of them having something that they can call their own as well as having certain issues addressed whether it is teen pregnancy, truancy, gang violence, things like that in order to overcome their odds. it is important to assist them and reach out to them. the community housing partnership, their track record speak for themselves. in regard to our reaching and working with people that have
4:38 am
been excluded in this society, people are afraid of what they don't know. it will introduce neighbors to a new set of communities. >> i am not only a resident, i am an employee. they have done a lot for me, to give me employed. i hope for the user, we get some kind of help that they really need, because it is going to be rough on all-out of people. if they don't get housing, it will be rough on everybody else. >> i am president of the golden gate valley neighborhood association. we heard about the golden gate
4:39 am
valley library. and edward the second is one block west of the western boundaries. we have supported this product from the very beginning. we think it is good for the neighborhood. we think it is important for us to shoulder some of the burden for this youth population. we think the community housing partnerships and the youth services our quality organizations. i've been impressed by the amount of negotiation that they have undertaken with our neighbors that are nervous about this project and i am not a entirely sure exactly why. i think the mitigation of a health and should help ease those concerns, like if there is an advisory committee or what ever it is of neighbors to oversee the implementation of this project. i just want you to know that there are many of us out there that think this is good, and we
4:40 am
welcome it. we are just not frightened by the unknown. >> over 60% of its population, what we see when the population actually attends city colleges, they become couch surfers. they go from house to house with no permanent or stable residents. a lot of them end up dropping out because there is no support services for this population. in the city of st. francis where we talk about these values of supporting and protecting the people that don't have a lot of protection, this is one of the projects that we should be supporting in san francisco.
4:41 am
i want to point out that this is a drop in the bucket of the real housing needs for this population. i want to make sure that we can be as supportive in san francisco for the population to continue to support projects that really bring this population out of poverty and out of their cycle of abuse. i want to wholeheartedly support this project and i hope that the board of supervisors can, too. >> i am with the council on community housing associations, we are in strong support of the project. you are talking about to institutions, they have had an incredible track record. these are organizations that we look to as a coalition, as models of how to get it done and how to do it well.
4:42 am
and that is a core value of those organizations. i want to put that into the larger context of the affordable housing community, a coalition of 17 member organizations that build housing, provide services and do advocacy. it is important that community- based organizations are here to stay. they don't build and run. it is different than thinking about a one-time project that you have to live with. these folks are going to build its affordability and quality because this is an asset they have to manage. they also build for their own property management viability because they have to own it, run it, and operate it. in terms of housing in the san francisco, some of the best managed housing in the best
4:43 am
management services is from affordable housing developers. i want to emphasize that this will be good quality, very well managed. >> i know it has been a long evening for you wallenda been hearing a lot about this particular project from folks. i want you to take a minute and clear your mind, close your eyes, and think about what image comes to your mind when i say a couple of phrases. foster care youths. homeless youth. are those images and scary? my comments are mostly directed from those fighting against this project. these images to scare them. they scare them ala. even though they may have moved
4:44 am
into the neighborhood that has the widest people in the entire city, that particular neighborhood doesn't have a gate around it. it is inside san francisco. i want you to think about that as you are moving forward with this project. it is not ok for folks to do this. it is not any different from the police officers standing with guns after katrina, trying to keep folks from coming out of new orleans. it is done with money, keeping people out of a neighborhood by using legal means because you have the money to do it. people who you are afraid of, who you are prejudiced against. that is not ok. we need to stand up against this, because there is no other way to describe that but wrong.
4:45 am
>> you have a lot of disabled people, people going into that neighborhood, they have things that they have to overcome right there. when i hit this town, i found a place to live in this big old victorian house. there are 18 bedrooms, and it was like 1/3 of halftime minimum wage there were a number of interesting characters. about a third of them were college students like myself. that is where my life interacted
4:46 am
with mr. garcia. what i wanted to show you is that san francisco is gone, it is not coming back. that building has exactly six people living in it. does the need for this kind of project. >> are there any other members of the public that wish to speak? why don't we go back to the appellant? >> there is a preliminary matter, the assertion that the association walked away from the deal. there is a memorandum of understanding that both sides
4:47 am
worked on, a condition of that memorandum that the project sponsor required was that they take the appeal, they lack the legal standing to do. i want to set the record straight. with regard to the comment that the sud as an affordable housing mechanism doesn't create a precedent. it would be pure speculation. to conclude as much, i would respond that such are a reasonably foreseeable development. i would direct the supervisor's attention to policy 7.5 that says the production of
4:48 am
affordable housing through process and zoning accommodations and prioritized affordable housing in the river approval process. be specific used in this capacity should have, under -- come under ceqa review because they are easily foreseeable developments. there are six sponsors to this legislation. prior to the analysis. therefore, it means that this legislation is as good as past. that is the type of city support prior to analysis that the case was concerned with. it was this kind of momentum that has a negative affect on the fair and objective process. going to the supervisor's
4:49 am
comment about the density bonus, i would like to point out that the density bonus law that compliance will be implemented. this means that there should be one ordinance, not a variety of sud's. on this basis, a request that the supervisors rescind it. supervisor wiener: is it your position that an sud can't be sponsored before ceqa
4:50 am
certification? the mere introduction of an sud or zoning legislation can't be introduced or co-sponsored before sequence -- ceqa? >> because it has six sponsors, it is basically a done deal. supervisor wiener: if i introduce an sud and my colleagues add their name as a co-sponsor, in your mind, that would be invalid? >> it creates the impression of city support prior to the completion of the ceqa analysis. under the factors, i believe this would show the kind of bureaucratic and financial momentum in conjunction with the
4:51 am
fact that the mayor's office of housing -- it subverts the sceqa process. supervisor wiener: supervisors can vote on the process once it has happened. we have seen that before. you are not signing in blood that you are voting for it. >> you would be in a better position to ansewer that than i. i don't dispute the lack of a rule, i realize it creates a lot of uncertainty and ambiguity. the fact remains that this was a project that got pushed through.
4:52 am
any additional questions? colleagues, any additional questions to any of the parties? all right, at this time, this hearing has been held and is closed. these matters are in the hands of the board. supervisor farrell. >> thank you, president. i understand that we are first dealing with ceqa. i appreciate everyone coming out tonight. this has been the source of a lot of debate for years in district two. but me first address ceqa. i appreciate the planning department answering the questions i had earlier.
4:53 am
i am going to make a motion to approve or item 36 and table 37 and 38. >> this is seconded by supervisor elsbernd. we need a roll-call vote because the house has changed. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> mar absent. >> mirkarimi absent. >> aye. >> there are nine ayes. >> colleagues, at this time i would like to make a motion that we affirm the planning
4:54 am
commission's decision on the conditional use authorization. the determined to -- determination to authorize the project was appropriate. i think there has been very sufficient analyses with all of the issues regarding to services, etc. i would like to make a motion that we affirm the planning commission's decision, which is approving item 40 and tabling 41 and 42. >> thank you. thank you to everyone for coming out and participating in this hearing. it is always fun to have and a problem to have friends on both sides of the aisle. for the past two weeks, we have been working hard to broker a compromise. unfortunately, we did fall
4:55 am
short. i am thankful to the board members that this is all you have had to see of this topic. ever since i started running in district two, this has been one of the biggest topics of debate in the district. as with the booker t. washington discussion earlier this year, i would imagine everyone who is appealing this believes in the need for more cheap housing in san francisco. it is an issue that we prioritize in san francisco and at city hall. i do not view it as an issue that should trump every other issue. in my mind, it is an issue that needs to be promoted. it also needs to be balanced.
4:56 am
as i will speak about in a second, what's lost is that it is all about the kids who are going to live there. and the need to turn a blind eye towards other development issue is to turn away from the project and compromise the experience of who lives there. let me be very clear. every other single development that comes across to our board, in our district or not, it does not matter to me. for the projects we have seen this year, we have seen them in district two, to build these developments into our neighborhoods and build them into the fabric of our neighborhoods. this is something i support 100%. i do not know about my colleagues. i have not talked to folks about
4:57 am
it. my family lives across the street from a transitional youth development. they are an incredibly well integrated part of the neighborhood and a contributing partner to the area that we live. much has been said today. we had a number of applicants including chp. it is a smack on the marina district. some initial contact was made to the neighboring groups. this was the first time that a lot of the neighbors had an opportunity to speak about the project. from the getgo, i have been very clear with everyone that
4:58 am
this element to the project has been the biggest problem that i have had as the developer. combined with the initial out reach, that was less than ideal. that is why we are here today for these appeals. to talk to some of the people like came here tonight, i think it is very important for me to articulate why i believe the neighborhood surrounding this project, all five neighborhood groups to represent constituents are around the project are part of this appeal. unfortunately. to dismiss the biggest myth out there, i want to dispel the notion that they do not want those kids in the neighborhood. ever since i have bent in city hall, there seems to be 5%-10%
4:59 am
on either side of the cartel that represent the extremes. the gentleman that came up and call the kids losers, he should be ashamed of himself. that has no place in our debate on the board. the advocates use -- who came out and spoke on behalf of the booker t. washington center and called certain neighborhood people racists because they wanted to take a 4 off of a building has no place in this debate. it is the middle where the real dialogue happens, where the real concerns are met. the people from district two who came out and spoke in an inappropriate way, i am sorry. that does not represent my feelings or the vast majority of people in the area. aside from the surprise element, there are two things that


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on