Skip to main content

tv   COVID19 Update with Mayor Breed Dr. Colfax - Data Driven Decisions  SFGTV  July 20, 2020 11:00pm-12:01am PDT

11:00 pm
former planning commissioner, we have prepared a letter and i will retreat what is in that letter. i found woody's comments about be appropriate and well researched. thank you. i won't repeat that. what i would like to do is put these into a somewhat larger context and san francisco has an unusually rich collection of art that was produced by the new deal agencies. one of the largest collection and one of the richest collections, probably in this state, and perhaps in this region. unfortunately, the various city and state agencies involved have had a mixed history over the
11:01 pm
past 80 years and in carrying for this art and as i indicated in an article that was in the journal california history earlier this year. so, i was especially saddened to read ucsf's proposal to destroy this art and on a bird's view. >> thank you. thank you for your comments. are there any other members of the public who would like to comment on this item number four? >> hello, my name is richard rothman and i am interested in murals in an fran and on occasion, ucsf is what we go into the hall and they told me
11:02 pm
they were going to build around them. if you've been in -- i called my contact at ucsf and they were going to build around them so i was wondering if one of the supervisors could ask mr. newman why they changed their mind. the last time i talked in february and when i found out in june that they were going to destroy them. why can't ucsf get around tobin
11:03 pm
hall and save the hall. it's very dangerous to move these murals. it's not something you want to do and maybe at the very, very last resort but these murals could be damaged and the other thing is where are you going to put these murals. these large murals and thank you for considering this important issue. >> thank you mr. rothman, are there any. >> public comment is closed. i want to say a few high-level
11:04 pm
things. the item before us is not going to change the world. but in the middle of the great depression has been a narrative in our society all my life. the new deal was what we all came to know as the new government golf at solution and millions and millions of people to work and and gave us this incredible legacy of art and public works that still serve us today and and i have known that for a long time but what i've come to realize is that happened less than 25 years after a pandemic that was the spanish flu that killed a half million
11:05 pm
americans and we had a much smaller population at the time and so i want to put this all in that historic context. the legacy of murals that came out of bernard sackheim were informed by that new-dealer a and i am starting to realize by the error that proceeded it that was informed by a pandemic, i am profoundly hopeful that we will figure out a way to preserve the express and what they represent and and i would like to commend this matter to my colleagues. i want to recommend mr. newman and the yo university of califoa and this is balancing act on the one hand, take care of
11:06 pm
public-health and on the other hand, take care of history and our art and i would like to send this to the full board with recommendation. are there any comments from committee member? >> thank you mr. chair. often times people will say, you know, why is this important? people will say -- they'll give you false arguments and false choices like, well, if we do this we're taking money away from x. if we do this, we're not able to do provide the level of healthcare. i know that there's a lot of interested parties and i know that there's a lot of individuals that would want to be part of preservation and this is an important part of our history and this is the type of art that is almost a lost art.
11:07 pm
it's something that is very, very special in the era and in the vane of deego rivera and some of the muralists that did this type of art. it's part of our history in terms of the great recession and putting people back to work and valuing artist and valuing their message and up lifting them. so, when i first saw the message that they were potentially water damaged and there would be at the cost of $8 million and they would be a choice between providing care or preserving, i didn't accept it and my message to the university was, we have to find a way. the answer has to be we're going to doing everything we can because it's such an important part and when you look at it in the concept of coyte tower and what this individual meant to san francisco history, jewish
11:08 pm
american history, and artistic history in the city and county of san francisco and in the united states, it becomes that much more significant and the pricetag becomes, in my mind, a secondary choice. and so i know there's a lot of indowd individualed that want endowed individuals that want to be involved in philanthropy and there's a 500 million-dollar commitment as part of the rebuild of this facility. so i know that we can find the way to do this and as you stated, family members have already taught abou thought aboe ways to do this and this is important and i appreciate you moving forward with this preservation. and i'm happy to support it. >> thank you, supervisor for your comments. any last words? >> no, no further comments. >> excellent. so, on my motion to move this to the full board with
11:09 pm
recommendations, madam clerk, a roll call, please, if you do not freeze. >> i apologize. >> clerk: on the motion to recommend --[ roll call ] supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor safai. >> aye. >> supervisor peskin. >> you have three ayes. >> madam clerk, can you please read items 5-8 together. >> yes, item number 5, is an ordinance amending the general plan to amend the market and making conforming amendments to the arts elements and the housing elements and making appropriate finding. item 6 is inviting the zone be map to amend the band van ness and market special use district and making other amendments to the height and maps and zoning districts maps consistent with the (inaudible) octavia plan. item number 7 is an ordinance with business and tax
11:10 pm
regulations to create hub housing sustainability district to provide a streamline administerral approval process for certain housing projects within the district meeting specific labor on site affordability and other requirements creating an excited board of appeals process foray peels of projects within the district and approving appropriate findings item number 8, the planning codes to amend the van ness and market special use districts toen cor additional housing and uses that support neighborhoods residents and businesses. to and to provide public comment should call (415)655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146-922-4815. press pound and pound again. if you have not done so already, please press star 3 to lineup to
11:11 pm
speak. >> ms. lang ios. my apologies for last week. we're a little stressed out. we would love to see your powerpoint presentation on the hub and -- >> we cannot hear you. >> good afternoon, members of the board of supervisors, lilly planning department staff and last week i provide provided an overview of the legislation and i focus on the equity assessment done from the hub as well as clarify the teacher equity work. i'm going to share my screen. if it doesn't work correctly, please interrupt me and let me know. >> if you can just put a little
11:12 pm
more sound i would be great. >> ok. the hub area falls within the boundaries of the octavia area plan. this is an area that's been zoned for high density housing since 2008. the plan before you would allow housing, additional housing and additional affordable housing. about a 20% increase compared to what is already allowed today. the plan provides for almost a billion dollars in public benefits including a new fee for community facilities and it responds for a desire to have input on how buildings will look and what groundfloor uses would be allowed. it provides an alternative.
11:13 pm
it grants more height on 18 sites but the new sites are not automatic and can only come through discretionary approval by the planning commission. it changes the rules for more two and three bedroom units to support families and restrictions on retail sides to support more neighborhood using and less parking. the plan would ensure height requires payments of all area plan fees cree you see the steps for an equity assessment. thank you a new tool the city is using. this is the first land use protect the department applied this tool too and we're still learning how to apply an equity
11:14 pm
lens to all of our work. there is not a professional standard yet on how to do this work. these steps were developed and then applied to the project with input from the community, our community equity team, and other city agencies including the new office of racial equity. we continue to welcome new ideas. the equity assessment tool is a framework for looking and it asks decision makers consider the implementations from a racial and social equity lens. it provides a structure for reflection and for integrating equity considerations. applying the equity tool can result in real changes to reduce, racial and social inequity, advance equity and approved success for all groups. for this plan, eight changes were made to the legislation as a result. there are a couple of ideas that extend beyond zoning and the board may want to consider
11:15 pm
these. the first step in the racial and social equity assessment process is to establish equity goals. the equity goals used for this plan strive to keep people in place and provide room for more a fort able housing and it will meet the needs of low income people and people of color. the anticipated benefits highlight the fact that new housing would be built on parcels without existing homes. there are no direct displacement. a new park in seem a. improvements to existing parks in the western edition -- >> direct displacement doesn't happen anymore. it's indirect displacement we all focus our efforts on but go ahead. >> safer streets and $682 million for affordable
11:16 pm
house. some of these changes include potential burdens too. although there wouldn't be direct displacement of homes, there would be some loss of retail and industrial jobs. overtime, there could be small business displacement and turnover. due to changing demographics and new retail demands. there could also be less tolerance for residents without phones who live in encampments. equity assessments include space for community concerns. and here somewhere other things that we have heard. concerns that groundfloor uses may not be neighborhood serving, concerns that market rate housing could add to gentrification pressures in adjacent neighborhoods and social and cultural disparities could reduce cultural diversity and a desire to see affordable housing units on site and a community based mechanism to proactively address these issues.
11:17 pm
with these burdens and benefits in mind, there are eight changes made to the plan, after the equity assessment. expanding the boundary for that open space -- >> these changes were made when? >> these were made following the equity assessment and they're incorporated into the legislation that is before you. >> right. but the changes were made at one date? >> >> specifically, we completed this equity assessment about a year ago. we began drafting the legislation in january of this year. so i can look up the exact date of when they were added but they were added at the beginning of this year. >> so post covid? >> yes. >> >> the office of racial equity did that in what discussion? >> we have conversations with them around the tools, specifically, that we're using. and then also sharing some of our findings from the assessment
11:18 pm
tools? >> and their response was what and where is that set fourth? >> i don't have a summary of their specific comments. they reviewed the findings that we have and we had a series of conversations about the specific legislation and discussing things that could be made from zoning and land use perspectives and then some of the things that would require further investment and discussion with other city agencies. >> thank you,. >> sure. >> the specific changes are, expanding the boundary in which impacting money can be spent to provide funding for projects in the adjacent neighborhoods. broadening the membership -- >> relative to the first, that is the existing boundary of one mile? >> currently, the funds, the infrastructure funds can be
11:19 pm
spent in the planning area or within 250 feet? >> ok. >> broadening the membership of the market activity cac, allowing a land dedication option for affordable housing requirements in the adjacent neighborhoods and new requirement to support community serving use that's the groundfloor. expanding the unit mixed requirement and new general plan policy to apply a racial and social lense to future land use decisions. new requirements to ensure that residential uses are the primary land use and so no stand alone hotel or office use would be permitted. and then allowing for more affordable housing with commission discretion and public input. this is not the end of the equity work and association with the hub. last week we heard community
11:20 pm
members asking for further equity work and this work is beginning now. todd co has hired advisers to develop guidelines for the hub area. this work will identify goals, benefits and burdens and we look forward to hearing from the community and consultants throughout this process. i'd like to leave you with the knowledge that a an explicit sht towards equality. the planning commission adopted phase 1 of the department's actions plan and this focus on the department's internal functions such as hiring and contracting. phase 2 and underway now and this work will focus on the department's external functions. such as community outreach, community plan, and regulations. and as part of phase 2, the
11:21 pm
department will continue to refine and adapt the equity assessment tool in collaboration with our commissions, this board and the public. so that concludes my presentation. thank you for giving me the opportunity to provide this overview. and look forward to answering any questions. >> thank you mrs. langois. are you saying that you agree with the proposal that's been set fourth by the community to do additional equity work as it relates to 15 of the 18 parcels of real estate that are before us? what are you saying? >> i'm saying the department is supportive of doing further equity work and we acknowledge that this assessment tool in the lens is new for us and that we can learn from consultants and from the community and having continuing that conversation is important and i think removing
11:22 pm
the 15 sites as an opportunity to have this future conversation, i think we have expressed some of the concerns and some of the things that the city loses by making that amendment and i understand the concerns that the communities had around the proposed legislation as it stands. >> thank you, that was a perfect summation but i won't say i am delighted that the planning department appears to be turning the page your record notwithstanding. with that supervisor preston. >> thank you chair peskin. i am some row mark remarks but o chair, if you or supervisor safai had questions specifically, i didn't want to jump in on one of those. >> i wouldn't say the
11:23 pm
presentation by planning is actually one of the best presentations i have seen. it is actually, to my mind, kind of an admission that planning has never seen urban development through an equity lense until now. that's been pushed through politics. that has been pushed through elections and that is the first time i've heard this from planning so i cannot tell you how appreciative i am that you are finally speaking the department, the people's language and albeit maybe there's some dis correspondence withidiscordance withinyour dep.
11:24 pm
>> i concur with you on that. i'm going to step back and talk a little more broadly about the hub development and the broader breast strokes what the community proposal is here. in terms of moving forward. can you hear me ok? chair peskin, you just froze on my screen and i don't know if it's on my end or yours? >> i can hear you fine. >> great, thank you. >> so, first off, thank you chair peskin and supervisor safai for continuing this last week. this matter for a week and it's been helpful for everybody to be able to digest all the details of the plan. the package that is before us is very broad in scope seeking to rezone 84 acres around the intersection of market known as
11:25 pm
the hub and outlined by planning last week. there are four pieces of legislation thatten pusses and hub area plan including a investmentments to the general plan business and tax code and related so i knowing maps and it's a very broad and very significant proposal taken in its entirety and it will have an impact not just the neighborhood but surrounding neighborhoods that i would argue the entire city. it's been referenced, 18 total parcels at issue and they have the rules changed with regard to what can be built on these sites and how tall, sense and how much residential and how much commercial and most importantly for whom. i think the stakes here he very high. the area plan will increase height density and traffic in this part of the city.
11:26 pm
i think the area offers significant opportunities to create affordable housing units, invest in public transit and mobility more generally. i want to thank the planning department staff for a lot of work has gone into this and this is a comprehensive proposal for the hub and there's been enormous work that has gone into this and the proposal that i'm laying out today which are community and led proposals and should not necessarily, should not be read as a criticism of the planning department's efforts in doing the equity analysis that's been addressed but reflect more the importance of this area and necessity for us to do it right. if we are serious and i believe we are racial equity we need to look at proposal and do it
11:27 pm
through a process that is community-led. some of this work on equity was done a year ago but unfortunately the more recent efforts by our office and the other office is impacted has been our outreach efforts that have been limited by the pandemic in recent months. it's made it much more difficult to have meaningful community engagement other than online forums. we have heard loud and clear from the coalition of community stakeholders led by communities of color they have concerns around what is proposed in the hub area plan. they reviewed the proposal and they've come to us with a question and supervisor chair peskin, allude today it earlier we have a phased approach to allow height and zoning changes for the project that gone
11:28 pm
through a thorough community discussion and pausing temporarily on moving forward until we can complete the more thorough race specific witty analysis that was previously mentioned. particularly it's imperative we as elected leaders centers and elevate the concerns that we hear from low income communities and communities of color and that's the spirit of the amendments that i'm interesting today and at the same time i think advocates have been careful here to thread the needle by allowing certain key sites to move forward and those are the furnished along in the process and have significant community benefits in the form of affordable housing in particular. and so i've circulated amendments colleagues and doing so as a request of community groups in conjunction with the other supervisor offices impacted directly specifically
11:29 pm
supervisor haney's office and also indirectly vice supervisor ronen's office and these amendments speak to limit the zoning changes to the three sites that have gone through a community process, the project site at 30 van ness and 10 south vaness and 98 franklin. the result of which is a considerable package of public benefits at each site. with buy in from the community we would essentially be fast tracking the necessary changes for these three sites in phase 1 and at the same time taking the time we need before moving forward with the broader rezoning. we're pausing for specific purpose as i mentioned which is to allow more thorough race specific witty analysis on what the effects will be on communities of color of the complete hub plan. the process to scope this analysis is underway and it's
11:30 pm
our intention to allow no more than six months for its completion. it's important for stakeholders on all sides, to understand that nothing in this plan -- nothing in the four pieces of legislation before us, is being rejected today. rather, i will be moving to duplicate relevant files and with the agreement of colleagues i hope and if i do so, we'll effectively be keeping the broader discussions of the other parcels and the broader rezone ago life at committee while moving forward to the full board with the projects that are in the process ofen title. and have offered the significant community benefits that i mentioned. i know, i want to mention the extent of the public benefits and these what are drives the community support for moving
11:31 pm
forward with these projects so at 30 van ness, 25% of the proposed 333 units will be offered at below market rate and $10 million will be allocated in affordable housing fees to the city, which will be directed to construct proposed affordable housing projects at fifth and howard or fourth and fulsome in the project area. at 98 franklin street, which south only one of the three key sites in that district and the proposals for 345 unit residential projects situated on top of five story podium which will serve as the new home of the french american international school as well as some 3,200 square feet of retail space on the groundfloor. working with both the community groups and my office related
11:32 pm
properties the developer has agreed to include 25% on site affordable there and higher than the legally required amount and particularly encouraged that of the affordable units, 80% of them, that's 69 units will be earmarked for deeply affordable for households earning 50% of the area an medium income and the 17 additional units will be for households earning no more than 100% of the median income. the developer deserves credit for working closely with the community and my office in agreeing to significantly proceed the legally required number of affordable units and i want to send my gratitude to the head of school and many many families and parents at the french american high school and students and alone who contacted our office and conveyed the importance of the project for our school community and their overcomeeling support and
11:33 pm
especially with enormous challenges for san francisco families and uncertainties around family health and safe tea and when schools will open and we appreciate the families who reached out and shared their thoughts about this project. i also want to know that my office has been interested in whether some of the particular affordable housing fees that are required for the area and then 98 franklin developer left to pay another $5.8 million in area specific housing fees, we have been interested in whether those could instead be satisfied by getting even more on site affordable units and at 98 franklin and more broadly in the sub and it's in the future to the other 15 sites. in discussing and exploring this, it's become clear that there needs to be a more refined methodology for calculating the
11:34 pm
number of units that the fees' s equates to. so among the other amendments i'll offer a non substantive amendment that will authorize the planning department and mayor's office of housing and community development to clarify the methodology for how many on site units equate to these areas specific fees as an option for developer and i want to specifically recognize that the developer at 98 franklin have indicated openness to further increasing the number of on side affordable units in lieu of the $5.8 million. when that methodology is clarified and we have a chance to see how many units that would be we're not obligated to provide those units on site, they were free to pay the fee but the office looks forward to continuing discussions with possible additional on site
11:35 pm
units when we have the methodology laid out how many units that would be and the project at 10 south van ness is for a mixed use residential and retail project with a total of 966 units of housing and 29,000 square feet of service space and as part of the community benefits package, the developer has agreed to allocate their affordable housing obligations to a land dedication for creating 100% permanently affordable housing and while the city has not played a formal role in negotiations, my understanding is among the sites being considered for this land dedication, it's 1979 mission street and no one as the monster in the mission. and that site, colleagues as you know, has been the subject of nearly a decade of organizing
11:36 pm
work for housing justice advocates and mission district active in particular leaders from the latino community. and while the approvals don't require the developer to acquire and dedicate 199 mission property specifically we know community activists see today's approval as commissioner to securing a 100% affordable site and i will say this, if this were to come to fruition at 1979 mission, it would be an incredible win and a testament to the power of community organizing and for the miss district and the housing movement in at large and for a neighborhood that has suffered the displacement of more than 8,000 latinos and over the past decade to lay the groundwork for 100% and envision and articulate as the marvel in the mission would be a milestone and an
11:37 pm
incredible accomplishment in this city. taken together these three sites have gone through a robust process involving community and various stakeholders and the results are three projects that have community support. and are appropriate to confer the significant benefits enclouded in the legislative package today. namely the ability to build at much higher scales than previously allowed. these projects have been before the court for just a little bit over a month and are being fast tracked but the the remainder of the parcel to the area plan do not yet have specific vetted proposals and not gone through this process and i believe it's in the best interest and city particularly given the reasonable requests for a equity study to be completed to address these other parcels in a phase two of the hub area plan. they're not ready to move
11:38 pm
forward. but enemy leon the sustainability district legislation it's one of the items before us today. this over lay as i understand it, would allow for ministerial approvals for project that meets certain minimum thresholds. i want to be very clear for the members of the labor community, who have reached out about this, that we are not rejecting and i'm not proposing that we reject, any part of the proposal that is before us today. we would be pausing to further the housing sustainability legislation and if a project in this area plan moved forward in the interim, nothing would
11:39 pm
prohibit or preclude and benefits and i would hope and would work with my colleagues to ensure that any such proposal would include nothing less as is standard for projects of this scale in recent history in san francisco. we'll admit that i have some discomfort locking in long-term changes for this entire central area of the city with so much uncertainty right now. about what the future holds. we should act deliberately in planning for the next 40 years and especially when we do not know what the next 48 hours may look like. it's part of the race anden equity analysis and we have a meaningful opportunity to weigh in with support with opposition and proposed changes. this has been a challenge and
11:40 pm
get in the pan and i know for my office and for you colleagues that are constituents, that it's been hard, as i said, to engage with our constituents. it's been extremely challenging to look at the feedback and -- and it's been a major transportation issue that are present. the market octavia has been a congestion nightmare and the prospect of adding thousands
11:41 pm
additional units and with them more than 2,000 private parking spaces, it seems like a formula that could significantly exacerbate an exiting problem. add to that and and ecommerce delivery vehicles and we could be left with a more congested city center when all is sudden and done under this plan. i think these are solvable problems. i believe that we need a clear plan on how to mitigate these issues. even though at the top level of leadership in our transportation agencies, we'll admit the future of public transit in flux solving congestion is impossible without better understanding of the role of public transit will be and have in the city at large. so, you know, all that said, in conjunction with the folks transportation agencies we can figure out solutions in the
11:42 pm
coming months and to be clear, i believe we're confronted with not only difficult problems arising from this proposal but also potential opportunities. one is them is an opportunity for the first time to directly center, in value, the voices of community of color in the planning process. in a way that is not just lip service but respond it their demands of how this should proceed. that say and a change, in how we can develop in san francisco. i also want to recognize it's long been the desire of many residents in my district and the surrounding neighborhood and to explore the further removal of
11:43 pm
it's in the amended legislation and this is before us and there may be an opportunity to accelerate that conversation. it's my strong desire, given the freeway rests on publicly-ond land that we can map out a long-term strategy where the freeway removal could result in the creation of permanently affordable housing on those sites significantly altering for the better the racial and equity impact of this plan area. it would seem to me as we pursue zoning of the area that we also plan for how we can accomplish these important long-term goals. so, thank you for your patients and a very long presentation but as you can tell, this is one of incredible importance to my district and the city. i have amendments which i circulated to chair peskin and supervisor safai and we'll also
11:44 pm
be moving to duplicate some of the files and happy to go into the details of those amendments or to do so after public comment or comments from my colleagues. thank you supervisor peskin. it was quite the presentation. supervisor safai, is there anything you would like to add or subtract? >> nope. >> thank you. >> all right. why don't we go to public comment. madam clerk. >> mr. chair, operations is checking to see if there are any callers in queue. operations, please let us know if there are any callers ready. >> there are 17 callers in the queue. i will queue the first caller. >> this is time paulson, thank
11:45 pm
you supervisors and sunshine, jussupervisor,i listened to you. i appreciate it. >> and 10 south van ness and we feel that everything has moved in the long direction -- in the right direction which you have all recognized. we appreciate that. we do have very big concerns because we did not want this to be slowed down. there was a lot of work put in
11:46 pm
prior to you being on the board of supervisors to make sure that labor standards were going to be in all of this hub legislation which if it did not move forward, it would not be part of the way developers would get their entitlements to move forward in other areas that are there. that could be in jeopardy and i want to be clear that that is an incredible concern to us and as with as i don't understand, i mean, i know there's a lot of work that has been done and there has been a lot of work done with the community and other labor folks and constituency groups to make sure that the fees that are done and the affordable housing stuff, which is so important, with so much housing being a part of this gets moving forward. we appreciate where that is in terms of what is sounds like might be a phased movement. we probably are still on record
11:47 pm
as saying we want this to move forward right now and even though we are listening. thank you for keeping those things. >> thank you mr. paulson, next speaker, please. >> hello supervisors, my name is david woo with the fill phone fo district. we're in sort of the hub plan and thank you supervisor preston and everybody who has done so much work on this. we must center the conversation of land use planning, zoning and development around racial and social equity. we condition keep going with the business as usual top-down model of planning that takes a profit-driven approach to land use in san francisco and the era of covid-19 and massive up risings against the police state, existing inequities have been exacerbated and laid bear for everyone to see. it's time that we address the
11:48 pm
again traification thagentrific. we know zoning and approves massive market rate development projects inflicts violence on working class communities and communities of color. the hub presents an opportunity to incorporate a community led racial and social equity framework into the planning process which directly supports the resolution passed by the planning commission recently. we support phasing the hub plan so this process can take place. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, chair peskin and supervisors safai and preston. my name is kits and i'm a co director of (inaudible). the mill project has been a vibrant space for communities voices on the walls of the alley. as an organizer with the mission
11:49 pm
district, organizations social and economic justice i'm calling into support the recommendations of phasing the hub area plan except for the three proposed sites until through racial and social equity analysis is complete. this is an anti development but a community planning process that strengthen the equity first trademark to build housing for all. a race and social equity report done correctly can be used to access how new development impacts the mission. we have attributes and our eastern neighborhoods plan failed these communities which is caused negative by marketplace development which we are historic able income and color and diversity. this is our opportunity to hold the city of san francisco accountable for the correct racist planning policies of the past. having a home is more than just affordable housing. it's providing the most valuable
11:50 pm
populations over all benefits from the neighborhood planning and policies that they have an equitable fee at the table. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is ben. i'm the secretary of red stone labor temple association. the tenants association of the historic red stone building in the northern mission. we're a part of the united to save the mission coalition. tenants include artists, latino groups, which serve poor and working people in the community. our tenants association supports a phased approval process of the hub plan so it will not further displace and harm low income and working class communities of
11:51 pm
color and in the mission, hey for and hub areas. we feel that too quickly moving forward with more market rate housing, even with so-called affordability components l. have a disastrous effect on the ravaged, poor, house and working people who are the majority in the mission. we need more inclusion in this process and that must start with the serious, thorough and social equity report. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. we have 37 listeners and 19 in queue. if you have not done so already, please press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, wait until you have been notified your system has been unmuted.
11:52 pm
>> good afternoon, supervisors. corey smith on behalf of san francisco action coalition. i'm not going to repeat my comments from last week but wanted to add two things as it related to the discussion here today. number one, we share supervisor peskin's concerns regarding displacement and want to be doing everything he can to put forward policies that reduce displacements and while building housing at all income levels is not a panacea for displacement, all of the research does show that building both subsidized affordable and market rate housing, across san francisco, will have the absolute best impact reducing displacement is a goal. and secondly, in the conversation of racial and social equity, the pro housing
11:53 pm
folks have pushed for adding multi family zoning across the entire city and so in this conversation, i don't understand how we can continue to have this important discussion and trying to figure out everything we can and troy to achieve every possible solution to make sure our city is a true place for everybody while still maintaining our single family home zoning. i hope this conversation leads to positive changes in that light as well. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> my name is kim thompson and thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak before you today. the reason for my call is to express my support for the
11:54 pm
proposed pub zoning legislation and the 98 franklin street. my husband has been a resident for 30 years and i've been a resident for over 15 years. we are a inter racial couple raising two inter racial daughters. our daughters attended elementary school and our currently attended children faith school. both receiving financial aid. we've been members of the international high school community for over a year and we couldn't ask for a better school on a neighborhood and it's the oldest and by binge wall school and they bring together people from many backgrounds and we have a shared culture with compassionate, and principled people and who love and support our school offers an amazing school program to families of varied socioeconomic background.
11:55 pm
the hub rezoning will deliver affordable housing and the kind of mixed use mixed income, transit oriented development plan that will serve san francisco well into the future. the 98 franklin projected will provide affordable units. i strongly encourage your support of french america international school and the 98 franklin street development. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker, please. we have 35 listeners and 25 in queue. >> hi, my name is gary i'm the president of the red stone labor temple association. at 16 and cap. i just wanted to echo my fellow tenants' comments earlier. that the tenants of the red stone building support more inclusion in this process and a
11:56 pm
thorough racial and social equity report. we support a phased approval process of the health plan and we're one block away from 1979 mission and supervisor preston's remarks i believe in the proposal to get 100% housing sounds great. realistically, you know, and also we need to plan for 40 years in the future. so many people are out of work and we can be entering another great depression, why don't we think about this a little bit and think about who can afford market rate housing. it makes sense to produce more
11:57 pm
affordaaffordable housing many f that's all i have to say you will be notified you have been unmuted and you may begin to speak. >> good afternoon chair. thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. my name is daniel greg. the carper ten's union is in full support of the hub legislation proposed here today. we grow with the plans' objectives to encourage housing, including affordable housing and services to meet the community's needs. the plan addresses two major issues we are facing. the first is housing and something we're very familiar with and does not seem to be going away any time soon. the hub legislation brings thousands of residents to san
11:58 pm
francisco. both market rate and a considerable amount of affordable housing as well. the proposed development as loan will bring 1600 units. another major issue begins to address is jobs. construction is a second largest industry in the world behind healthcare. the economy is hit hard by a combination of recession and the covid-19 pandemic. all three have made commitment to labor and have an active history in san francisco and a track record of making sure the projects get built and belt with union labor. this means jobs for hundreds of san francisco construction workers, opportunities foray prentice shipforapprenticeship. approval of this plan will not solve the housing crisis of fully bringing us out of the recession it's a huge step in the right direction. in conclusion, i want to reiterate we support the hub plan. we ask the land use and
11:59 pm
transportation committee support the plan as well. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker please. you will be notified you are unmuted and you may begin. >> caller: good afternoon, my name is marie and i'm calling to support the recommendation of phasing in the area hub plan except for the three sites until a racial and social inequity analysis is complete. this recommendation is not anti development but it is community planning this is a moment to hold the city of san francisco accountable for correcting the racing planning policies of the past and it's important to have a home during the covid times
12:00 am
and any other time. thank you, very much. no planning without us. members of the public can call other the number and i.d. press poun pound and pound agai. press star 3 for those who have already pressed star 3, please continue to wait. next speaker, please. you will be notified that you have been unmuted and you may begin. >> caller: hi, good afternoon supervisors. my name is sam and i am a renter in the mission. and i'm calling to support the hub rezoning and issue concerns regarding this additional equity review. while i