Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  September 29, 2018 4:00pm-5:01pm PDT

4:00 pm
i think that this is a very bad idea. you have heard time and time again from the comments that environmentally, this will not be good for the community. whether you work or you live here, it is bad. so i think something that we have been seeing throughout our time here in san francisco is that who is this development for if we are proving development plans, who is it for? i work with workers at the filipino community centre and, you know, there has been a lot of improvements too. you know the 15-dollar an hour wage increase. even with that, i am finding that many of the workers that i work with have to take on two or three jobs to actually make ends meet. so who are we giving back to? workers keep this city alive and they contribute to the economy and we really need to think
4:01 pm
about their well-being and the well-being of their families. in the soma, we have a highly concentrated population of working people in san francisco, and i really think we need to be giving back to them. again, i think that we really should be thinking about the kind of development that we are invested in in terms of health and safety, and who will be displaced in the process when we approve projects like this. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is patrick. i am a youth worker with the filipino community center located in the excelsior district of san francisco. i am here to support the appeal of the central soma plan and request that you support their appeal because multigenerational migrants and working-class families in communities will be displaced in the name of so-called development.
4:02 pm
we want families and communities in the soma to decide how they want the neighborhood to be because they know what is needed to build up the neighborhood. i believe that allowing the appeal will do just that. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is charlie and i'm here to support the appeal. this appeal is not for no development. it is for development that protects the health and welfare of south of market community residents. all of you supervisors sitting in those chairs have inherited inherited an incredible responsibility. you are wrestling with very difficult decisions. we ask you to make sure you understand that you are making decisions that impact the livelihood of the long-term survival of community members in the south of market. it is easy to rely on the so-called expert testimony of real estate professionals in
4:03 pm
this plan. but the real experts are the community members in the south of market. the working-class families, youth, and elders in the community and in this room. we expect that you center the voices of those that are most vulnerable, those who have the most to lose, not the most again in these development decisions. the rich network of community organizations are those voices. if they file an appeal, that should be caused to pause and reconsider this plan to ensure it does protect the health and welfare and develops a community members that are in the south of market. otherwise you will be putting your names next to a plan that will be a major force of gentrification and displacement and significant environmental impacts in the south of market. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is paul. i am with fatf and i work as a
4:04 pm
community engagement coordinator i am here to support the appeal. the e.i.r., as we understand it, posed a stark safety risks to the soma. it inadequately studies the health impacts of increased noise, degraded air quality, safety hazards and increased windspeeds. increased car traffic and increase in pedestrian industry -- entry are also under represented in the e.i.r. degraded air quality from increased idling due to traffic, increased rideshare vehicles and increased truck traffic will harm the soma. particularly seniors, children, and the differently abled. it also plans -- fails to provide open space. it is not friendly to children, youth and families. and they are also not protected by the shadow ordinance. there must be a clear plan for creating space and public
4:05 pm
recreation that is truly accessible and considers -- considered as a top priority for the safety and health of residents. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, supervisors. my name is katrina and i am with the filipino american development foundation. we support the appeal of central soma because it reflects the two -- true interest of summer residence, legacy, institutions and neighborhood organizations. i also would request you stay present and attentive while i am talking. our mission strives to ensure development of the community without further displacement of working-class and immigrant communities and while the central soma plan is presented as an opportunity for new employment and housing, 77% of that will be market rate. and taking into account the socioeconomic status of the residents. communities residing here cannot afford a market rate housing. their majority the area, it is a protected p.d.r.
4:06 pm
production, distribution and repair business as. these jobs are very prevalent in district six. with the zoning changes, it will displace p.d.r. jobs but result in hyper increased land values making way for more tech offices and more hotels and market rate housing and these increase land values, as a result of the zoning change will inevitably mean rent increases on both the soma residents local businesses. if the central soma plan is as serious as a claims about it's commitment to maintaining diversity of it's residents, then further research needs to be done regarding the effects that new developments will have on current housing prices. the current e.i.r. does not present policies, new regulation , and/or concrete solutions that directly safeguard against destructive effects of zoning. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i i'm rachel with the filipino
4:07 pm
american development foundation and arts and culture administrator for soma filipino. i'm speaking in support of the appeal of the central soma plan and also urge your support as well of the appeal. historically, filipinos have been in san francisco for a century and are continuously marginalized. the central soma plan needs to address the health impacts, air quality, and pedestrian safety of the families, youth and seniors that live, work and learn here. the proposed plan will provide an influx of more office space and housing, but doesn't provide adequate open space to offset the pollution and carbon emissions that would increase with the additional office workers and residents that this plan would attract. furthermore, soma is already hazardous to pedestrians. with a high pedestrian fatality rates, the plan needs to address these issues in a culturally
4:08 pm
relevant way by including midway crosswalks that incorporate culturally relevant designs. as well as open spaces that are accessible to community members, seniors, youth and family. and also include a requirement for living walls and/or living roofs and all new developments. per capita, district six has the least amount of open space in san francisco. this plan needs to include the existing community in soma and protect their health and ability to thrive for generations to come. i asked, that u.s. supervisors, support the appeal and revisit the e.i.r. in a just and adequate way that put seniors, youth and family first. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> supervisors, my name is francisco. and i represent the first people
4:09 pm
of san francisco. it is a shame that this city just had a summit on the environment where the focus was on health. health and living. and what some of you departments do, you encourage death. the indigenous people of san francisco, among which i include the filipinos, have suffered a lot. but they have contributed a lot. we need representatives who have their heart in the right place. and what i see here are a number of representatives who worship lucifer. they are the devil and you don't
4:10 pm
like to be told some bad words, and i will not say some bad words, but i will say something that you deserve to hear those bad words. because those bad words come from frustration. you supervisors, what has become a of you create good leaders gone away. -- what has become of you? good leaders gone away. you leaders are pathetic. pathetic! she pleaded with you all to do the right thing. she -- they lived here for 15,000 years. this land was pristine. and just 250 years, you have created a concrete jungle. shame upon you. >> thank you for your comments. [applause] >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is thomas and i live in
4:11 pm
district six. i would like to say that i support the appeal. i support the appeal of the central soma plan. earlier this month, a homeless person was hit by a car around 11th street, and i fear that if more people are displaced, and more traffic is routed towards soma, this will be a more common occurrence. i think it's irresponsible to bring more traffic into soma at this point. that is all i have to say. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello, my name is jason. i am a resident and i am a board -- on the board of directors on a live on the fifth floor and have no view at all. for me, it has always been about the increased risk of cancer that the plan brings to our
4:12 pm
neighborhoods. the e.i.r. states that excess cancer risk to residents at near second and fulsome, where i live , would increase by as much as 20 times. yet no additional feasible mitigation measures has been identified to reduce this impact to acceptable levels. even without the addition of car share services and other things that have increased the congestion of the neighborhood since the e.i.r. was created, over six years ago, it still states that the plan generates traffic would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. i understand that many people want this plant to move forward. i also understand a lot of companies will profit from this plan. but at what cost? the cost of the health that anyone who lives or works in my neighborhood. public health is one of the most basic of community needs. this plan does not look out for that. my father died of cancer at the age of 59. i am already at a higher risk
4:13 pm
than average for cancer. moving forward with this plan, as is, would significantly increase my chances of cancer. i will leave you on this. just last week, my wife and i had dinner with some friends and we were sitting around the dining room table having a great time. the window was open. it was one of those beautiful san francisco days. i started thinking about how much i loved the city and how i am glad that we made this our home, and that if this plan moves forward, the way it is right now, i will have an unavoidable impacts that would significantly will significantly increase my risk of cancer. all because i want to enjoy my home, that i built in a city that i love. this is why i support the appeal of the san francisco soma plan. that is the only reason why i support it. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon.
4:14 pm
i am a principal at an acoustical and air quality firm. i present the following comments on behalf of my partner, who unfortunately was not able to be here today. our firm submitted a report on the e.i.r.'s cancer risk assessment on september 10th, 2018, which is in opposition to the appeal. s.f. blue relies too heavily on an e.i.r. cancer risk assessment of 226 chances per million which is a misleading figure, as framed by s.f. blue. this cancer risk assessment is based on an existing plus project scenario. this is an unrealistic, hypothetical scenario for the year 2014, where all the traffic increases from the plan are placed on top of that year's conditions. under this scenario, the e.i.r. arrived at a cancer risk of 226 chances per million. the actual cancer risk will be much less. much of the 226 chances per
4:15 pm
million comes from diesel vehicles and emission rates in 2014. there are now stringent standards and regulations that are greatly reducing diesel emissions. by 2023, there will be substantial reductions in diesel emissions. substantial reductions are also expected from gasoline vehicles. the e.i.r. it looked at these effects in 2014 when the plan would be fully built and predicted that the maximum cancer risk would be 8.1 chances per will -- per million. much of the area would have a considerably lower risk than 8.1 chances per million. this is a more realistic evaluation because the plan would be built out over time. thus, the 8.1 chances per million cancer risk assessment is the value that the board should give the most attention. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon -- good evening. my name is john. i'm a resident of district eight and a member of the housing
4:16 pm
committee. we stand at -- we stand here in solidarity and with our filipino neighbors, fighting against gentrification and displacement. the e.i.r. for the central soma plan fails to consider how much of this housing will be used for short-term corporate rentals, and fails to consider how much homelessness will increase if it moves forward. we urge the supervisors to uphold the appeal. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is gina and i work in soma. i support the appeal of central soma plan because the e.i.r. omits analyses of the current trends of residential units not being used as traditional housing. without adequate controls and enforcement in place, the s.r.o. into soma will not continue to be used as open and accessible affordable housing options. these condos will be affordable
4:17 pm
only at a high-end luxury housing or city -- sitting vacant because they are owned by investors who have no intention of losing these units. condos will be used as commercial short-term rentals and/or student housing instead of residential use. the city needs to counterbalance the massive displacement that this plan will have by protecting existing s.r.o. buildings by amending existing laws would know s.r.o. building that can be converted into tech co-ops like what happened to the park hotel. there must be a strong enforcement from the city by allocating funding so there are staffing from the city to monitor and regulate this. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is laura. i am a family caseworker in soma i am also a resident of the tenderloin. i am here to the appeal of the central soma and request you also support the appeal because there are direct and serious
4:18 pm
health impacts that results in gentrification and the displacement that must be studied and taken into account. the u.s. centers for disease control states displacement has many health implications that contribute to disparities among special populations including the poor, women cracked children , the elderly, and members of rush -- racial ethnic minority groups. displaced people are prone to stress, and mental health issues including the death. there is also a direct connection between displacement and homelessness with the 2,017 th san francisco point time count indicating 70% of homeless individuals surveyed were housed in the city before becoming homeless. sixty-five% -- the central soma plan creates the second financial district at the expense of families, youth and seniors living, and working and going to school in soma. the scale of development and the mix of commercial office at high lecture development described in the plan are not conducive to a healthy neighborhood. the e.i.r. must be studied
4:19 pm
against the city's healthy development measurement tool which was developed by planning, in partnership with the department of public department of public health and organizations. further, there needs to be bylaw , meeting and exchange between communities that live here on the developers and those involved in the planning. progression cannot exist back or any kind of progressive policy, any sort of progressive plan, cannot exist without our voices. what i am asking for is true and honest dialogue with the community that exists here. for us to be considered in the planning. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. >> a lot of people spoke on the lovely half of san francisco's -- san francisco. but what does love have to do with this? my name is tony. i work in soma with f.d.a. we support the appeal and
4:20 pm
request you also support the appeal. because the e.i.r. does not adequately study the health impacts from increased noise, degraded air-quality, pedestrian safety hazards, at increased wind speeds. are very concerned that any increase in wind speed will cause a hardship for seniors and people disabilities. we have had members at f.d.a. who have been severely impacted by wind in the south of market area to the extent that one of our members, a senior, was blown to the ground and had to spend much time in a recovering facility with a broken hip. it is already hard for folks to walk by the federal building because of the wind, caused by the architecture and structure. also, the extent of increasing
4:21 pm
automobile traffic is underreported in the e.i.r., and the potential incidents where pedestrian industries from automobiles is also underestimated. south of market is arty considered one of the dangerous neighborhoods to walk around in because of pedestrian fatalities the degraded air-quality from increased traffic, increased idling from vehicles stuck in traffic or increased right hailing vehicles are from increased truck traffic will wrote -- will have detrimental impacts on the health of seniors , children, youth, and families in soma. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is mary and i work in the south of market and i live within the central soma plan boundaries. i'm here in support of the appeal because the inadequate transportation infrastructure is not fully considered in the e.i.r. the transportation infrastructure and adjacent to the plan area of the central soma e.i.r. is far behind that
4:22 pm
infrastructure needs of both past and current growth. the plan is predicated on the construction of the central soma subway that connects central soma to chinatown. the central subway addresses a transit need that is long overdue as a public transit. soma has been inadequate for decades because of years of lack of infrastructure improvements. the central subway is addressing a pass need, not a present or future needs. according to a statement given by sfmta spokes people to the san francisco examiner on august 20th of this year, the city is going to allow google buses, chariots and other private modes of transportation to use all transit red lanes in the safety. and these additional corporate giveaways need to also be studied under the e.i.r. please uphold this appeal and to send the central soma plan back to planning for further review. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.
4:23 pm
>> hello, supervisors. my name is alexa and i am born and raised in a south of market but i also live and work in south of market. i support the appeal of central soma and request you to also support their appeal because displacement has an environmental impact. regardless of the assertions in the e.i.r., the environmental impact due to displacement of residents from their homes or small businesses in the south of market, especially when considering the huge increase in vehicle mileage travel that will result with this proposed plan. there are several ways that the central soma plan encourages displacement in an area already suffering from increased evictions and skyrocketing rent. a u.c. berkeley study in collaboration with ucla found that soma is undergoing advanced gentrification. it happens when people are replaced. the e.i.r. encourages illustrate high housing in soma which in turn encourages the price of
4:24 pm
other housing to increase. landlords of adjacent properties begin to charge more rent to cash in on the new population in the nearby luxury condos or new high-end shops. my family and i are already facing eviction and we were fortunate to find another unit in the same block. just within a few years, my current housing is in a vulnerable state and my mom is in fear of getting evicted again going through an eviction is not easy and a lot of us here today that are here to support the appeal are not having it anymore with evictions and displacement. especially that everyone loves that community. please uphold the appeal. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is enrique. i am a resident in district six. i support the appeal of central soma and request you to also support the appeal because the
4:25 pm
impact of a new office space and lack of local hiring requirements are not properly presented or studied in the e.i.r. the e.i.r. is inadequate on the grounds that it is not incorporating policy with respect to office-based development controls. the e.i.r. lacks clarity of how it will comply with proposition m. especially in light of the passage of proposition oh. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is ramon. i am a resident of district six and i'm here to support the appeal against the central soma plan. because this plan will lead to increased gentrification and displacement across our entire
4:26 pm
safety city, also this plan proposed 35,000 new jobs. but those new jobs will be in the tech sector and majority of new market rate housing. this plan would not only benefit the wealthy, it is also going to benefit only the higher allocated, nonresidents. it will displace our community by engaging in a development that benefits private interests at the expense of existing residents, nonprofit, small business and community service institutions. please uphold this appeal and send this plan back to the planning for more further review thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is dean. i'm a resident of district six. i support the appeal of central soma and encourage you to support the appeal because the environmental impacts from this displacement were not analysed in the e.i.r.
4:27 pm
the gentrification caused by this plan will have a country pulled environmental impact. because those who will be displaced by this plan will still be commuting in the city. we demand an adequate study on vehicle miles travelled including gentrification impacts thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is juliana. i'm a resident of district six. i support the appeal of central soma and request you also support their appeal. because there is a lack of green space in soma at a high concentration of automobiles. this issue needs to be actively addressed with ideas such as living walls, currently the central soma plan only includes living groups between -- inside 5,000 square feet and longer. with building heights of 160 feet and less. they should be standard requirements of all living green
4:28 pm
walls are living green roofs and all new developments. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is a drill and i am a resident of district six and i support the appeal of the central soma plan. because a central soma plan creates a second financial district at the expense of families, youth, seniors, living and working and going to school here. the scale of development and the mix of commercial office and high-end luxury development described in the plan are not conducive to a healthy neighborhood. the environmental impact report must be studied against a city's health development measurement tool which was developed by planning in partnership with the development of public health and community organizations in the eastern neighborhood rezoning. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i work in soma. i support the appeal of central soma.
4:29 pm
i request you would support their appeal because a plant continues to provide an inadequate amount of open space. the soma is the most open space deficient neighborhood in san francisco. along with the neighbouring tenderloin. instead of providing sufficient green and publicly accessible open space, planning has been defaulting to provide new open space for so much a privately owned public open space. they have a negative impact on the community for many reasons. the spaces are truly not open to the public. and activities are discouraged and ours are limited. they are not protected by the proposition kate shadow ordinance because they are not open space owned by the city, recreation and park department. the third one is this space does not create the open space that is public at accessible for youth, families, and seniors. just like a public park. with that up the city needs to create new public parks on the caltrain railyard with
4:30 pm
opportunities also for affordable housing. by purchasing the land from caltrain. there should be at a requirement that the community meet design standards and the community be reviewed by having a set of 3-5 outdoor spaces and have a nexis study on prop kate shadow ordinance and all public space in soma. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, sir. >> good afternoon. my name is chris and i am a soma resident. i support the appeal of central soma and urge you to do the same there is insufficient analysis of the impacts of displacement. we are tired of hearing that there cannot be any environmental impact of displacement and therefore it should not be considered during the project review. first, when people are displaced from their homes, and their home
4:31 pm
is probably where they work in san francisco, the obvious conclusion is displacement will result in an increase of vehicle mileage travelled because people still need to get to work. second, we appeal that you take into account the impacts of displacement and trauma on the health of our residents, the compounding impact of those who are displaced from soma is not an abstraction. the city's actions on the health of it's residents is an issue. just as much as a vehicle miles travelled. without sufficient study, the e.i.r. is fundamentally flawed and fails to provide full disclosure of the project's impacts to the public. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is rupert. i live and work in the tenderloin and i am part of the soma filipino community. i am in support of the appeal.
4:32 pm
our community is dwindling. giving a name to a neighborhood will not stop the evictions. we experienced a traumatic eviction of an elderly couple this year run across from the office at her fighting the eviction of four filipino families in the building. fighting this is exhausting. holding onto our place in the city, even if the number of housing pales in comparison to the number of people moving in and to the eviction notice, come on a weekly basis. it is letting us know that the rich want our pop-ups and our food trucks, our music, our night markets, our customer service but they want us to go back to stockton after we are done. the plan will turn the filipino cultural heritage district into an empty tourist attraction occupied by a neck beards. please uphold this appeal. we need someone who can show we can be more than just a piece of paper. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is victor. i am a resident of selma since
4:33 pm
1973. i support the central soma plan appeal. i am here on behalf of of the hard working class families. my family is one of them. i just want to ask you guys to really look at this plan carefully. if this plan is good for the city then make it good for everybody. make sure it is safe. and none of the working class families should be moved out of the neighborhood because this is very convenient for us. we are the ones who work in the hotel his. we work in the restaurants. and most of us here, including me, i am a caregiver. i take care of a senior. if i am asked to move out of the city, it will be hard for me. not just for me, but those who will be moved out of the city. i know one family that used to be in the area and they were
4:34 pm
asked to move out of their apartment and they moved all the way down to east bay. it is hard for them. it is hard for them to travel back to the city because it is where they work. the kids go to school here. it is very difficult. we don't want that. so i am here to ask you guys to really look at this plan carefully and make sure that the working class families will be protected and we will remain here in the city where we can have easy access to where we were. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is leo. i'm a bayview resident. i had to come and speak because i am very impressed on these people who come out here and support their cause. whether you are for it or against it, they are here to support their cause and makes that matter. because my bayview brothers and
4:35 pm
sisters, they don't come to support us, but i come and i support it, whether they come or not. this does make a difference. i support their appeal too because anything that has to do with health, health is first. health comes first. because we are human beings. we are not structures. we are not pavement on the sidewalk or something like that. health always comes first. thank you. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is tj. i live in the tenderloin and i work in the soma. i support the appeal of central soma and request yours you all to support the appeal because the e.i.r. does not address the lack of affordability of housing incentivized by the plan and the social economic makeup of new residents that will result. the plan does not provide any studies or figures of new development to driving down
4:36 pm
housing costs. as the e.i.r. states, what effect development under the plan would have on housing affordability as a matter of considerable controversy. and that the influx of real estate investment and higher income residents may increase the gentrification of the neighborhood with displacements of households being a negative outcome. the e.i.r. of the large part of central soma of zoning a property increases the values of the underlying land which leads to increased cost for residential and commercial tenancy and increased sale price is. therefore, existing residents or small businesses are paying less than the new market right and will be forced out. i urge you to listen to your constituents here who have taken time out of their busy schedules just because they understand the disastrous impacts of this rezoning. the plan is nothing more than a plan for the displacement of existing residents and small businesses. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.
4:37 pm
>> hello. my name is teresa. i am from the housing program. we stand on the decision that the central soma plan and supports the appeal filed by the south of market community action network. we are aware that the plan is in accordance or following the plans according to the plan bay area at which, a flawed plan. the area itself is based on a supply and demand solution that we know will not solve the housing at affordability crisis. we are concerned that this will create a second financial district and that much of the growth will be very much concentrated in a small area plan. we are also concerned that the e.i.r. does not address the prop
4:38 pm
m. and we request the board of supervisors address how the area affects the prop m. we are also concerned that the e.i.r. fails to include analyses of state density bonus program which will allow for developments without guaranteeing additional affordable housing units will be built on site. and one of the development that has gone away with the bonus program is 33312 street which only put 13.5% of affordable housing on site instead of 18%. in addition, board of supervisors need to think of the impact of the plan bay area and the affordability crisis in san francisco. as a population increases, so does the definition of affordability levels. we have seen the increase of 8:00 am at night in san francisco in the last three years. -- of a.m.i. in san francisco in the last three years. by 2018, it jumped to 65,100.
4:39 pm
because of the affordable right back has increased. is that what you call affordable at this point? >> thank you for your comments. thank you for your comments. thank you. next speaker, please. hello. >> i work in the soma. i support the appeal of central soma and request that you also support the appeal. there are no new protections being implemented by the e.i.r. for existing tenants and community serving institutions. as shown in the berkeley report on transit oriented development and gentrification, areas in the bay area that have convenient access to transit are areas most likely to suffer gentrification and displacement. including soma. the central soma plan talks about increasing land values as a primary reason for the
4:40 pm
underlying elements of the central soma plan, yet it does not adequately take into account the fact that increased land values because speculation and displacements. the increased land values presented in the central soma plan is a recipe for massive displacement of existing residents and small businesses. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is erica. i work in soma. i support the appeal of central soma and i request you also support the appeal because the inadequate transportation infrastructure and impacts of right hailing companies like uber within and adjacent to the plan area of the e.i.r. are not fully considered. the references in the e.i.r. are completely inadequate. the impact of a car can, in no way, be acquainted with bicycles
4:41 pm
in terms of traffic or environmental impact. their vehicle circus -- circle endlessly. there is going to be 30,000 workers in central soma and the increase in right hailing and t.n.c. traffic not only increases vehicle miles travelled, the new standard in assessing traffic impacts, it also impact the level of service at many intersection citywide which would have a ripple effect on traffic patterns across the rest of the city. thank you. >> thank you, for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is diane. i'm a resident of the richmond district and i work in the south of market. i think the main thing that supervisors need to consider is will this plan make the housing affordability crisis better or worse? this is the legacy of your time here in office. the community has, in many ways,
4:42 pm
done the work for you in thinking through the technical arguments. i am so proud of all of the ways that they have come up here. they have gone through this huge plan, over many years, and have analysed it and are telling you, technically, why it is wrong. politically, will this actually make the housing affordability crisis worse? of course, it will. look at the housing and office and balance that is built into the plan. this plan will only take care of some of the richest corporations in the world. it is prioritizing the land for class a office. the most expensive type of office in san francisco and certainly in the world. in the south of market, there is a huge opportunity to actually build in what we should be building, affordable housing. we should be taking the value that is added to the land in up zoning, and protecting
4:43 pm
rent-controlled units. this is something the south of market has been asking for for a very long time. instead, what we are doing is prioritizing the needs of some of the richest corporations. please listen to the community and think about, what is your legacy and how are you going to improve the city of san francisco in this crisis? or only make things worse. all of your neighborhoods will be targeted next in order to make up for the imbalance that is in this plan. all of the new workers will need a place to live if they will be another wave of gentrification and eviction. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is andrew and i work in the soma. i support the appeal of central
4:44 pm
soma and request you also support. the e.i.r. does not address adequately the health impacts, degraded air quality, pedestrian safety and increased wind. i am concerned that this increase in wind probability will present a hardship to seniors and persons with disabilities. it is hard for them to walk by the federal building due to the wind in the area. also the extent of the increase in vehicular traffic is underreported in the e.i.r. and the potential incidents of pedestrian injury from these vehicles. it is underestimated, as well. soma is already considered one of the most dangerous neighborhoods in which to walk due to their pedestrian fatalities. in addition, after construction, the degraded air quality from increased traffic and increased idling from vehicle stuck in traffic, or ridesharing services or from increased tow traffic. it will all have detrimental impact on the health of seniors,
4:45 pm
children, youth and families in soma. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> supervisors, my name is joseph. i may richmond district resident and here to speak in favor of the appeal. the central soma e.i.r. fails in it's obligation to disclose adequately the entire impacts. some of the ones that i want to highlight are the citywide impacts of land use changes that the plan creates but has not been studied. it became apparent during the informational hearings when planning staff revealed increased housing needs induced by the plan would be addressed by future developments and up zoning in the western neighborhoods of the city. it is too bad that supervisor ghee is not here to talk about the impacts on district seven.
4:46 pm
but i definitely wanted to hear what supervisor fewer has to say about the increased gentrification and increased pressures that will come to the richmond district as a result of this plan. the impacts of displacement are also not adequately studied in the e.i.r. we are constantly told the displacement is an environmental impact. however, please consider the current residents will be displaced by the plan. some will have enough income to be able to move back into the area because they can afford it. some will get lucky and will be selected for one of the few below-market rate units. most, however who live here currently, have low income and will be permanently priced out. the central soma plan is primarily a job plan. assuming the people are displaced, they will not come back -- welcome back to the city to work. but people who cannot afford to live in san francisco will be commuting from far away to their place of employment.
4:47 pm
how does this increase vehicle miles travelled? please look at the u.c. berkeley study that was recently published about the impacts of a high housing cost on displacement in the bay area. thank you. >> thank you, for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is laura. i. i am a tenant councillor at just cause. we stand in solidarity with our allies from soma. i have mentioned -- as mentioned throughout the hearing, the plan will further exacerbate the jobs of races housing in balance. it fails to properly address our desperate need for a truly affordable housing in san francisco. as a councillor, i can attest that this profit driven development will continue to have a huge negative impact,
4:48 pm
especially in other parts of the city, including the bayview, mission at excelsior, from where we see a lot of tenants coming in every day. they are sharing their fear for eviction and harassment. they are facing these partially due to the influx of high paying jobs in san francisco. i am also disappointed to say that for almost every board of supervisors that i have attended , we have to respectfully ask all of the supervisors to truly pay attention and leave out your side conversations and your phones. we are here not only for ourselves, but we are also here for the people that we serve who are not able to come. the seniors, people disability people disability and people who are working two or three jobs to be able to afford to stay in the city. thank you for your full attention. once again, we stand for the
4:49 pm
development without displacement please listen to the appeal. all we are asking for is truly healthy neighborhoods, housing for all, clean air and water and this development is the opposite of that. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, board of supervisors. my name is matt and i made resident of district six. i'm here to support the appeal of central soma and request you support the appeal as well. i don't live in the central soma area. i live in the western soma, but all soma is connected. the insertion of another financial district into our district is one that will have far-reaching impacts to not just the central soma community, but all of district six.
4:50 pm
the creation of a second financial district is not conducive to a healthy neighborhoods. soma is not just a place to just build more tech offices and more high end retail luxury condominiums. there are real communities in soma that deserve your attention as well. i think the e.i.r. should be studied again against that healthy management tool. i want to add that all soma is connected. and building more office space will ravage the neighborhoods. it is something that is terran communities apart right now. we should not let the siren song of more tech jobs drown out the sound of speculation, eviction and the strain of economic
4:51 pm
activity that is on our communities here and now. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors or good evening. i am with d5 action. all of san francisco will be affected by this plan. i support the appeal. the plan doesn't do enough to make sure that the city shares in the windfall profits that you would be conferring on the current and adjacent owners, developers, and of course, the speculators who are slathering, shall we say. that is one point i want to remind you about. what can you get more for all of san francisco when you are giving so much? secondly, the job, housing, a linkage, based on 1979 figures gives a certain amount per
4:52 pm
square foot, instead of per employee to the affordable housing fund. in my first job, i had an office that was ten by 12. do you know how many employees are in that kind of space today? we need to update that standard and make sure that we are not losing out on affordable housing dollars. in conclusion, the central soma plan should be revised to take into account the appeal. it may take a couple more years, but it will be a better plan. it will be a plan that, you supervisors, you can be proud of as part of your legacy in san francisco. thank you. >> thank you, for your comments. next speaker, please.
4:53 pm
any one of these issues would be harmful left unmitigated. of an inch complete eastern neighborhood has devastated the mission. displacement of 10,000 residents, neighbors in
4:54 pm
churches, families in school gyms didn't have to happen. learn from the historical mistake us made. don't perpetuate them. support this appeal, take the time and require proper analysis and let's get it right this time. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> thank you for allowing me to speak in solidarity. i am with the latino club. as a san francisco native who lived through the trauma of displacement. i understand the fear with the residents. the environmental intake does not take into account commercial uses. this needs studied with appropriate enforcements to make sure permanent housing built. the e.i.r. does not address lack of affordability and makeup of new residents much more affluent. 30 to 60,000 jobs will be coming
4:55 pm
to the soma making it a second financial district null we figure out a way to regulate tech companies to train and hire locally this will pull the majority from the talent and cause waves of gentrification with people with no sensitivity to the cultural history of the neighborhood. i barely recognize the mission. do not be short sided with the five of the soma community. >> thank you. >> madam president, i am wr duffy, neighborhood activist. sorry to bring this to your troubles. if you like local you would have liked the global climate justice march very much. i don't see how you could not support this appeal. reject the eiei.
4:56 pm
i am from the market. we have a variety of restraints on all sorts of thing in the plan. those constraints were put on in 1980 based on the street capacity. since that time the street capacity is lowered, and we know of a great number of environmental constraints we did not know of in 1980. we know the sub infrastructure that is essential is continuing to collapse. the cdc released a study four days ago that said rather than having life expectancy increase in the united states it is now decreasing. health officials have known for 20 years at some point life expectancy was to decrease. they thought it would be around 2040. in just two years it has gone
4:57 pm
from 2040 to now. gone down into the -- i guess it is the depression babies now going to be the longest aged people ever. we have just given big corporations a $10 billion sea wall. what more do they want? i appreciate the interest of the person closest to the podium. >> thank you. next speaker, please. hello, supervisors. i am here with my comrades in solidarity with the appeal and their opposition to the central soma plan. i am a supportive housing provider in san francisco for folks on probation, and my hotel is located on sixth street.
4:58 pm
supervisor stefani, i am in your district. i have grave concerns about this. this plan does not seem like it is for us. it seems like it is for tech companies and carpetbaggers. i don't understand how this plan is supposed to benefit the low income community. you know, i serve as a supportive housing provider. i don't know where you will find other shos who lease to the people on the margins of society. it is not like these thing are easy to acquire. i really, really urge you guys to reconsider this plan. go back to the drawing board, take the community's concerns into consideration, and thank you. >> thank you for your comments.
4:59 pm
next speaker. >> laura clark. i am here to speak in support of the appeal and in opposition to the blue condo association. you tom kin has put forward the most compelling testimony i have heard at the board of supervisorses in a long time. i want to give a shout out to the powerful message they have been giving how this is a plan to add way more jobs than housing. every district should be worried about the ramifications of that, that the current pipeline is slowing down to dead, yet office is still penciling. if you go forward with this, it will be setting off a jobs bomb. we have seen what that looks like in san francisco. we have been added 8 jobs for everyone unit of housing for the past 15 years. we know the tragedy on our city.
5:00 pm
if we go forward with this plan, we will see that continuing if we do not add sufficient housing. this body has the capacity to add more housing. do not listen to the fake arguments by the blue condo owners who are worried about cancer and not advocating for public transit. that is -- i am not going to use the word, but please. . >> thank you for your comments. >> madam, clerk. to laura clark's point we are speaking for certain appeals than others. you have two opportunities to speak you have to split your time, if possible. i know this is awkward. i don't think we have had an appeal with so many appellants. they don't all agree together. i want that clear for the members of theli


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on