Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    May 12, 2014 4:30pm-5:01pm PDT

4:30 pm
for holding this important hearing. i think the most important thing to us is that we get this right. this is an hugely important development we've been spending times with the community folks and others we believe in nodding we getting got it right as you know, we voted for an entitlement process which means we went to community meetings tens of meets, if you will, with the commissions and a variety of department heads here and came up with plan that's a conceptual plan the blue print how to move forward. it was signed by the appropriate people and came up up to the board of supervisors and side board of supervisors gave it's
4:31 pm
blessing and it was signed into law. we went forward with the blue print. i'm not happy we're visiting 4 years later so things we thought was clear. i'm sure you're aware of once we gain our entitlements we dwlo a fairly extensive plan based on the fact we're entitled and approved per the laws and rules of the city. so the bad news is candidly we're in the process and i must say i had a flashback i thought i was back in 2009 going 0 through the process of rethinking this. we can't afford to rethink this. the good news we have shown an ability to work closely with the
4:32 pm
city with the officials of the city and the department heads we've had to sit down with the various department headings heads and better understand what they're trying to seek from our plan. i can tell you that i would be thrilled to have the plan that was presented to the commission the ocii commissioners earlier this are i'd be thrilled the 25th street was grand plan i think it kept all the urban design integrities that everyone fought for but it turns out we don't get the final say we have to go through the departments and as such we're directed to change certain things and the street width is one of the things we're required to
4:33 pm
revisit. so i would only say that sure this process is important it may have citywide ramifications but i would only again note that we believe we're moving forward on an approved process with the approved guidelines and, yes while interpretations that was approved in 2010 may differ from department to vice president it's truly imparamount that process is the time to determine those kinds of issues is people can move from the point in time to move and build the project envisioned. i hope we can moved and again thrilled with the plan we put forward a few months ago we are
4:34 pm
in the business of complooimz and that's what we have today, the numz we have great relationships with the department heads and the chief take a look at at some of the plans and we could move the street width we did. where we couldn't he stated clearly we couldn't because we felt that will under might be the design integrity and the chief was willing to look at our decisions so far but we're not happily tooicht because we've gone beyond this >> supervisor cowen. >> thank you for coming up i'm listening to the presentation
4:35 pm
charge will say impact be are are we talking about reducing the open space or roougdz the single-family homes what is the impact going to be and frankly, i think this community is the one that pays the costs. >> at this point, i, tell you supervisor cowen that we don't - we believe we've adjusted the plan to retain the number of single-family homes and your offeral entitlements we'll lose some space but will be able to adjust to some stent we have some design work yet to do this is a 10 to 15 year process so as we go along we've been able to adjust along the way so fundamental feeling right now
4:36 pm
all the comments we've heard with respect to the number of homes and with respect to to the parking spaces and the number of homes we'll retain ma of the traffic calming measures and keep the the bulb outs and we've accommodated some plays but where we thought we couldn't and shouldn't we reduced the widths and made the recommendations he i believe dpw accepted the recommendations. >> i understand had a i guess there's a vote that's happened at the dpw they've accepted the map? >> for alice griffith but not candle stick. >> okay. thank you. thank you >> my understanding is that on
4:37 pm
a number of streets not all of them to accommodate the increase in strth width the sidewalks are being reduced from 15 to 13. >> yes. we've frankly reduce the areas with the infliction areas and we're elongated them as opposed to to keeping the width. >> my office went through the material that grifbt and ocii gave us, however, you want to describe it that there was some park space mann than bs been reduced that was described as four or five months ago but
4:38 pm
overall to 2010 that was some increase to the project and as a result of the square footage devoted to the streets there will be some loss of parking space. >> i speak that's true we only have socialization spaces so we have to lose something somewhere. >> thank you. >> i mean somewhere in this binder you have done an analysis some sort of study san francisco do you not have that in front of proven of you. >> i did not. >> maybe we'll safe that for another hearing. i want to say not only it this is significant change to the project but this is some of the questions we had with dpw and
4:39 pm
mr. ram as well the question about whether 26 feet is the new adult space line 20 feet being the default babies without this hearing this decision would have been made with zero public process with no sunset on it conversations among the departments that would voluntary led to the presumption of widower streets whether or not right or wrong i respect people that disagree with me but the public should be aware >> the only thing i want to acknowledge ocii has not take the opportunity to go over the analysis to see how the change impacts. open space, bikes lanes and more
4:40 pm
importantly my considerations are the public housing correct me if i am wrong i see the yes signs they have not had a chance >> i would say point to the fact it my sincere hope this is not yet the beginning of a new set of processes with respect to this particular development because all that meanings maples we have to stop and wait for the outcome maybe in the grand scheme of things not necessarily front and back anyone here we were supposed be in a process to move forward by a plan that was adapted by the board and signed by mayor in 2010. so inadvertently stepping into a
4:41 pm
significant process who be belie everything that the first process was to set aside so this is critical for this hearing >> thank you, mr. booer. >> thank you supervisor wiener. this is a very important hearing not only because we get new community right but having the right strdz standards to reclaim the right streets from traffic danger. you've heard the testimony the fastest roads kill and wide roads kill. there's a huge body count from bad streets designed. and it's probably the biggest safety problem we have as a city. it also makes the city less
4:42 pm
liveable for all of us we've turned our streets into bad things this is gentiles the elderly and the children that are the worse impacted by balanced designed roads. the top 3 reasons people leave is the insafe streets and housing costs. so making streets deadlyer there's got to be better ways in streets are bad during the construction phase restrict the use but designing streets that are overly wide for decades to deal with an issue only happening during construction is stood up. we could look at fire trucks and so on. there are many, many miles of
4:43 pm
streets that are 20 feet or less clear hundred of thousands of people live on those streets their narrower than 20 feet so we can't fight fires here i think there's the best streets to live o on. we should be able to have fire safety but widening streets to 26 feet is bad policy >> thank you director. >> thank you good afternoon, supervisors i'm sheryl brinkman ii happy service on the sfmta board of directors but i'm not here with that hat. thank you for this. i firmly believe we can build save streets and accommodate the emergency vehicles i know what
4:44 pm
calendared staff we have at sfmta we also have an amazing opportunity to build the neighborhoods that will be safe and welcome for all road users and help us to meet the vision zero and goals and an opportunity that a lot of cities would love to have thank you to your oversight 10 to 15 years from now the board of supervisors or sfmta is not trying to see how those streets would be safe they are will be. in the hearing today we've heard a lot of good ideas to accommodate the fire department and the speakers have good ideas. i think that using the example of extreme conditions that are horrible didn't help the conversation it circulates the fear in people. i think we have more to fear
4:45 pm
from everyday poorly designed streets from the conscionable horrible concentration we see. i'm confident we can moved with compromises >> thank you. >> chairman and supervisors thank you for calling the hearing. san francisco beautiful director. san francisco beautiful spearheaded the upper plan that went into the complete streets designed for the streets for the new development comply with that and the intent for the best designs we have for our country. we have we appreciate your careful attention to the changes so the publicity u public take the opportunity to talk about
4:46 pm
the public spaces. we looked to hamburger about those issues and looked forward to hearing from the department in communicating with the elective body and each other so we can have a process and street design that's liveable everyday. thank you >> thank you very much director ramos. >> good afternoon supervisor wiener and supervisor cowen. thank you very much for having this hearing today. you might recognition me from the sfmta board of directors, however, like my colleagues director brinkman i'm not speak on behalf of sfmta but on behalf of the transform that's a nonprofit organization seeking to design for walkable community. frankly i've been working there 8 years making it a career of undoing what we're talking about
4:47 pm
doing making the streets less dangerous from the beginning and instead not design them to be more liveable and walkable and safe for everyone. i've almost made a career out to trying to make at a easier for the facilitytion of good growth and development within the cities. i understand the concern of the developers this has been vested mayor ed lee by the community and a process by which the fire department had a chance to review earlier we need to move on and find other compromises. in addition the directors comments we could not put parking on the development on those streets that are under
4:48 pm
construction and with places you could put is jack to hold up fooikz but in a nutshell we appreciate the safety concerns the fire department but people get killed not only in jaywalking but get killed in krooksz from high-speed traffic >> thank you very much (calling names) those are all the names i have so if you want to speak please come up and fill out a card.
4:49 pm
>> thank you supervisors for having this hearing. i'm with the citizen and disability action and the advisory committee. but i'm here to talk about as a i would call myself a citizen in training with a lot of experience in pedestrian safety. and part of being citizen in training the older i get the more confused i get you had a clear idea when i got here but there's a lot of miss interpretations of rules and who knew what and when it soolz the fire department come and finally looked at what going to happen in the development and came up with a concern and solution which i feel is a simplistic way
4:50 pm
of coming with a simplistic ideas. the fire department and the development should look at how they're to build the buildings and the safety standards in building them and what kind of materials to prevent or reduce the probability of fires. and also look at other solutions just then saying we need widower streets so one safety vs. another when it comes to pedestrian safety. so all those condominium conversion of who said what the bottom line is we really need to look at the solution that the fire department now is coming up
4:51 pm
with not just simply say widened the streets. thank you, thank you very much >> next speaker good afternoon supervisor wiener and supervisor cowen. i'm dr. verona honeycutt i'm with the citizens advisory committee that is working with the city to oversee the development of the shipyard. the shipyard is the communicated driven project and the cac is the longest community oversight body of any project in the history of san francisco. we support moving the shipyard project forward we're already in the implementation stages of sfaes one housing development. fwraerng very surprised to see this project today. we at the cac has sat in meeting after meeting and some of our
4:52 pm
members have been involved with the project forfully to 20 years we've heard everything we need to hear about the shipyard where were the public works and the fire department why did they not work through the process earlier so we wouldn't be here he 11th hour to figure out one way or another what to do. we're at the cac are in agreement we know the firefighters jobs are not easy and we appreciate them. and we're appreciative the conversations how to improve those streets but we do not want to discussion to be a reopening of the shipyard plan and project we definitely don't want that. the project design was approved in a buy in from all the vice
4:53 pm
presidents it went through the board of supervisors and the project is in process at alice griffith. you need to know supervisors that the shipyard a a great 0 source of pride and represents not only jobs lenar has provided over $30 million in community benefits more than any project in the horrifies of san francisco. ? a monument overlook project we're grateful to lenar for his leadership and going on engagement with the city and community leaving. the cac wants to see the project continue on schedule. thank you for your fine work you're both doing and we appreciate your efforts >> thank you for all your work. thank you. next speaker.
4:54 pm
>> for the record. supervisors the subject, of course, is the hunters point shipyard master plan. >> could you talk into the microphone. >> i'm marketing internal revenue a development planner a member of 15 years with the hunters point shipyard cac and i was the chair of the subcommittee. my comment on the hunters point shipyard mastered plan that was approved the brief comments the hunters point shipyard master plan was in the making for over 20 years a direction the city department of planning the numerous citizens in the wizarder san francisco community at that particular time in the planning process and the master
4:55 pm
plan in its final plan was done and the hunters point shipyard master plan take into account all the known points from the san francisco in the 21st century and my comments the fire department apparently has the master plan as follows:. where i began any career in planning in the 1970s the suburban plan were widened to accommodate the fischer and relate to this they're more extracted than the 18960s and paving over larger acres of lands must be acknowledged while no one can deny that adequate assess it is important disseds
4:56 pm
problems can't be fixes by yesterday's solutions and they must take into account all of today's circumstances looking at the major cities across the choice they never thought years ago. this is critical that everyone comes together because sustainability long term and short term is absolutely preliminary circumstances that new solutions that integrate all concerns is required. thank you very much. thank you very much >> dr. jackson. >> dr. espanola jackson and, you know, it's too bad you have
4:57 pm
two minutes number one i'd like to say the history of bayview hunters point most of the people don't know anything about the shipyard area not holland. when the baseball field was at the candle stick i had to go to the department of public works to get the stop signs put up in my neighborhood because those of us who went to church because the ball players wouldn't let us in you're not concerned about the height of the citizens of san francisco because if upper if you were you would want to know history. now and then in 1962 the alice griffith project was built and there was no epa point a time itself area a land field the
4:58 pm
shipyard is land field it's a toxic site and that was put together by the navy not us there was a lab board set up to say when things what about exchanged in the city and guess what the ramp board was kiss continued by last mayor because they were pushing down everybody's throat lane and people that dying and still dying and sick public utilities the public health department and city planning and the supervisors have been the rubber stamps for the continuing of the people in bayview hunters point the death of those people if you pass on this you're not different you're not different than being raciest against the
4:59 pm
people >> this is a hearing no votes. >> you're going to come back later and vote you've been doing it all the time. >> thank you. next speaker. . >> thank you, supervisors i'm rick hall. i i don't not will have is prepared speaker but a resident of district 10 and sometimes go to the meetings associated with district 10 and i do support whatever district 10 residential groups want. i live in katrero hill part of the district 10 when i go out to district 10 places like captain sullivan's meetings. i've learned a lot about my other neighbors and learned that
5:00 pm
they're not just - it's different out there not the sort of intense castro and everybody wants walkable streets they drive a lot and have concerns about roads. their - they don't get the transportation they need i know we've got like a team out there but to where this project is going you need major transportation changes. and until you get that those people are going to out in the ear are going to be driving. i really need to get our transportation. and in sync as a driver i suggest