tv Mayors Press Availability SFGTV November 15, 2021 8:00pm-12:01am PST
>>. >> clerk: there is no public comment. >> okay. thank you very much, all of you, for that report. >> okay. next item. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> clerk: item number 10, resolution approving and authorizing license number 1,382 with treasure island series 2, l lc, a delaware limited liability company, for the use of the ferry terminal
located on treasure island, san francisco, california. >> so we had mentioned that we will be initiating or the developer will be initiating ferry service in january, so this license is meant to facilitate that, and rich will present that. >> thank you. rich [indiscernible] for use of the ferry terminal located on treasure island. in 2003, ticd was selected as developer for treasure and yerba buena island. in [indiscernible] along actua
facility. >> okay. i'll bring that up again. thank you. >> any other questions or comments? are there any comments from the public? >> i have a question. when you say just for use, rich, so will people be actually using the ferry? >> there will be an initial service from prop s.f. that will provide the service. again, it's a limited service, ferry service, that'll come from san francisco from the ferry building to treasure island. >> okay. so will we the one
months, there might be a little different [indiscernible] to be able to get into different areas of the island, but right now, i think things are mainly going to be staying the way they are. >> and do you have any idea of when it's going to open up, the cars to the island? >> yeah. i think the ferry service might reduce the number of cars coming out because i think folks will hop on the ferry to come out. >> i'm kind of thinking about the folks coming from the east bay. >> okay. that's a good point. >> okay. thank you, rich. >> thank you. >> want to build on that quickly. >> yes. >> is there going to be a bus stop at the ferry terminal? >> yeah, i believe there's a
bus stop adjacent to the ferry terminal now. >> there's currently bus service to building one, which is directly across from the ferry terminal, so that will continue. >> well, i'm sorry, bob. we'll continue to have the bus stop right where it is now because that seems like it's right there or the shelter, at least? >> right now, it's going to continue to be a bus stop. eventually, there will be a full shelter constructed. as rich mentioned, there's work going on at the front of the island to reconstruct a causeway. there will be some traffic
changes to -- the permanent causeway will be coming next year, and it will be realigned in front of building one, as well, but the intention is to have a stop today just as it is to the north. >> excuse me, bob. i would like to [indiscernible] discussions to have the [indiscernible] definitely would be dealing in debt with the construction infrastructure and at some point, so we can put weda out there. they need to be [indiscernible], you know,
comprehensively with transportation [indiscernible]. >> okay. thank you, linda. so this motion -- there's a motion and a second. there's no public comment. we will take a vote now. roll call vote. [roll call] >> clerk: there are five ayes. >> thank you. the ayes have it. next item, please. >> clerk: item number 11, timma update on toll and discount policy draft recommendations. >> so is it rachel that will be presenting? hello, rachel. >> yes, rachel will be presenting. >> go ahead. >> good afternoon, directors.
rachel hyatt for sfcta or treasure island mobility management. i do have a colleague with me, connie cho, who is a consulting project manager with us, in case there are questions that she might be in a good position to answer. so my update for you today is the same content we just gave to the timma committee yesterday also an an informational update, and don't want to cover the grounds that rich just covered in the previous item. you know we have two performance goals for the
transportation program and all of the traffic congestion management revenues will be devoted to that end and it identifies the service levels of transit that need to be in place to enable them to be self-sufficient and that would be dedicated to funding transportation as well as the means to manage the traffic impact of the development on the bay bridge. they're slated to be occupied
in 2022, so want to be able to provide information to purchasers or prospective purchasers of new homes about what the program looks like. the transportation program itself, as rich was just describing, will be operational in its full capacity in 2024. so rich described this interim program in 2022-2024 that will be provided by tidc, the developer, paid for and operated by tidc. the permanent program, so that included the weda, ferry service overseen by timma, the new east bay bus service and shuttle, and the revenue, so the congestion total, the parking management, that was launched in 2024 subject to
those milestones are also converging on a 2024 completion and open for use, so the south bay project is expected to be complete next year. west side bridges here at 100% design and what's shown here is the bike path is in environmental review, ready for design. treasure island is, of course, an equity priority community, and for that reason, the timma board and this board has also voiced these principles for supporting the current residents as well as future residents and workers, so a number of resolutions have been adopted protecting them.
earlier this year, timma adopted a policy to provide a transit pass for anyone in low market rate housing as well as workers, people working on treasure island. the full price version of this pass would be purchased by folks living in market rate housing with their homeowner dues. this will allow for unlimited access to all of the transit service as well as the muni services touches treasure island. and then, most recently, timma adopted a program to support adoptability of subsidies for nonprofits as well as a cash stipend that employers can use
to offset any additional transportation costs that they face, whether they're employees or additional costs such as for deliveries. what i have today is a proposal for glooifrltsd be eligible for, so looking ahead to -- as the land use buildout expands and there are more travelers on and off the island in the future, supporting affordability for those residents who might move into below market rate housing in the future or workers who are part of employers who may not be receiving the business subsidy. the base toll policy we're proposing is broadly consistent with the past direction and we've also kept in mind the
existing policies on the bay bridge as well as other work that the bay area toll authority is doing to increase affordability and accessibility for the bridge toll payers in the bay area so that we can minimize confusion and take advantage of existing or, you know, imminent administrative processes where possible. [please stand by]
everyone up to 120% of area median income. so this would encompass anybody who is eligible for the below-market rate housing, would be eligible for a discount based on their income. and very low income households we propose that would be exempt all together. and this is a more extensive discount program than the bay-area authority is
contemplating right now for express lanes. but what it does allow is for anybody in the below-market rate housing to be eligible for a discount. and there's one thing just to clarify is that this discount would be available to anyone who has a fast track account, you know, regardless whether they're a resident. so this may be a future worker who is a low based worker and would be eligible or the family and friends of current or future residents who live elsewhere in the bay area but would qualify based on being moderate or below income. we are documenting all of these proposals in a revised version of the 2021 version. which we plan to make available very soon within the next -- within the next 10 days we anticipate.
and we're holding a virtual open house to answer questions and hear any feedback on november 17th. and folks who are interested in that can go to our website sfgov.org/timma to get a look at it after the 17th if they're not able to join on that day. thank you very much for your interest and we look forward to your feedback. >> president tsen: thank you. rachel. and this is not an action item. it's good to get an update. i'm going to open it up to the board for any questions or comments. yes, linda. >> thank you so much, rachel. and it seems that you have made
tremendous movement. and i watched the board of supervisors and it was very impressive, the outreach that san francisco transportation authority has been conducting. and the questions that i have and a lot of the questions that we posed, due to covid, and talking about having answered any just for the public record, i want to you reiterate that to your presentation. there are so many things, but for specifics. i was concerned about seniors, low income and disabled and very low income, and coming to your program with the ability to have answered that. it is important for you to
reiterate that so that people can hear that those people that are low income actually are going to have those discounts for that. that is very significant. and i want to make sure that everybody understands that. and people with low income are going to get a discount and there is also a depreciation between the period when everybody has to go out. so you are low income and you have to take your child to school on the island and this is already -- you're not going to be [indiscernible] according to the schedule. and also great to see that during the weekend that at certain hours regardless of low income or whatever, this provision to have it free so
that people on the island that were low income san franciscans that want to come to the island to visit their family or just to recreate or to just . that has to be taken into the situation. rachel, if i am a worker and i'm working in a restaurant and i am low income, could you reiterate what this means for them? i know that you say they are also -- because you are low income regardless where you are, it is already taken care of. but i wanted you to reiterate that so people can hear that. especially for the restaurants and some of the workers. >> yes. thank you so much, director richardson. you are correct. a worker working in a restaurant or any other business on the island who may live in antioch,
for instance, or elsewhere in the bay area -- that worker is still eligible for a discount or an exemption based on their income. so if that worker is very low income they would be exempt. and if that worker is at 100% -- 120% or below of area-median income, so moderate, and they would need to have a fast track account to get that (please stand by)
the clerk today is erica major and i would like to acknowledge the folks at sfgov tv for staffing the meeting. thank you. >> clerk: minutes will reflect on participation through this meeting, public access to city services is essential and we invite public participation in the following ways. public comment will be available on each item of the agenda. each speaker will have two minutes to speak today. comments are offered during the public period are available via phone by calling 415-655-0001. the meeting id today is 2492 276 7226.
then press pound and pound again. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussion but in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, please dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. it is best to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and turn down your television or radio and you may submit comment in the following ways -- e-mail myself email@example.com. i will forward it to the supervisors and make it part of the official file. written comments may be sent via u.s. postal service to city
hall. finally, to appear at the board of supervisors agenda november 30th unless otherwise stated. madam chair. >> supervisor melgar: thank you madam clerk. please call item number one. >> clerk: an ordinance to accept grandfathered medical cannibis dispensaries from neighborhood notification and review appropriate findings. members of the public who wish to comment should call 415-655-0001. the meeting id today is 2492 276 7226 and then press pound and pound again. if you haven't done so already,
press star 3 to line up to speak. >> supervisor melgar: thank you madam clerk. we are joined by acting director of the office of cannibis john pierce. welcome. and he is joined by who are available for questions and we have the city planning department here as well. welcome mr. pierce, the floor is yours. >> thank you supervisor melgar and thank you for your time supervisors peskin and preston. the legislation we are talking today is sponsored by the mayor's office and we're going to give a brief overview. so what we're talking about today applies to medical cannibis dispensaries. they existed in san francisco before the legalized cannibis in 2016. some are more than 10 years-old
and licensed under article 33 of the public health code. when they opened, they went through the full planning process. essentially, the office of cannibis has been processing cannibis for equity applicants per our mandate and while waiting to process, they have been operating under a temporary authorization to sell adult-use cannibis while they stay under public health code. to be clear, currently these businesses operate under a medical cannibis issued by the department of public health but also have temporary adult use licences issued by our office. we're approaching the point that the medical cannibis dispensaries will be transferred on to article 16 of the police code, the permit administered by our office. and during that process, these will undergo a full cannibis permitting, including a series
of checks by the planning department such as. from the transition to the article 16 permit, they are exempt from a public hearing. we support it for three main reasons. first, the department of planning whose code we are discussing supports legislation. we support their knowledge and judgment on this matter. second, because these dispensaries have been selling adult-use cannibis since legalization, switching from article 33 to article 16 permit is more of a legal change than operational change and third, as part of our process, the medical cannibis dispensaries will be required to meet with neighbors and draft a good neighbor policy and office of cannibis will review the good neighbor policy,
involving a public meeting and notice requirements for that process are in some cases more stringent than the current planning hearing. our applicants have to notify landlords and tenants that the community outreach is going on and require feedback. for all of the reasons above, the office of cannibis is happy to support this proposal and we're available for questions you may have. >> supervisor melgar: thank you mr. pierce. if my colleagues don't have questions, i have a question for you or perhaps mr. star. you went into it a little bit, i wanted to know how the 311 notification process is different from the process you are going through with these folks just because that is a concern i have heard from some neighbors. how are they going to know what is going on through this process and will people really understand what is going on.
if you could talk us through that, i would appreciate it. >> sure. i'll talk about our process and then mr. star can chip in. our process is to notify everyone in a 300 foot area, business owners, tenants, landlords, that the business in question is proposing to transition and that notification is sent out and all of the language is required by the city and involves a community meeting where neighbors come and they express concerns they may have to the applicants and then the applicant drafts a plan and that is sent to our office and we review and approve it. without review and approval, there's no licence to be issued. our understanding is because these businesses have been there a significant amount of time, we believe most neighbors know what is happening and because they are granted a temporary licence from our office, it is not a
substantial operation change. we are aware of the importance of ensuring that everyone has an opportunity to express themselves and incorporated it in our process. >> supervisor melgar: before i ask how that is different from the 311 notification process, if a neighbor wants to provide specific feedback or, you know, weigh in on whether these folks are good neighbors or have been good neighbors and should continue, it is through this process that they would be able to do that? >> that's correct. and i'll let -- you can jump in. >> thank you john. thank you for the question chair melgar. doing that in addition, the project sponsor requires contact information from the staff member and that member will
serve as community liaison. if neighbors have concerns, they can contact the liaison to have questions addressed. that good neighbor policy will serve as a leading document moving forward. if neighbors have questions, talking to business owners, if the business owner adopt any kind of new condition from their neighbors, they will be given conditions and if they don't, they will follow up with business operators. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. mr. star, how is this different from the 311 notification? >> sure. 311 notification is only 150 feet and not 300 feet and goes to all owners and occupants and lets the people know within that radius that the business will be changing from medical to cannibis retail. they have 30 days to file a
discretionary review and that can go to the planning commission for a hearing. i think -- our thinking with recommending approval with this, businesses have been operating for four years already and no material change in the operation of the business from the medical cannibis to dispensary. because we have an office of cannibis that regulates the licence more efficiently than we could, their process seems like a better way to deal with it in that respect. >> supervisor melgar: we're trusting if someone wasn't a good neighbor and the neighbors weigh in and tell you that, you would have the discretion not to
issue a licence. for the retail? okay. thank you so much. colleagues, do we have more questions for these gentlemen? okay. with that, madam clerk, let's go to public comment, please. >> clerk: thank you madam chair. we have -- we're checking to see if there are callers in the queue. press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. we have no callers in the queue madam chair. >> supervisor melgar: okay. i'm sorry. all right. so with that, public comment on this item is closed.
colleagues, do we have a motion to send this out with a positive recommendation? >> supervisor peskin: i think director peskin put up his hand or i'm happy to. either way. >> supervisor melgar: okay. madam clerk, can you call the roll on that? >> clerk: (roll call) you have three aye's. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. item two please. >> clerk: an ordinance in the planning code to allow signs and marquees in addition to
projecting signs in various districts and in certain chinatown mixed use districts. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on item 2 should call the number on the screen, 415-655-0001. id is 2492 276 7226 and then press pound and pound again. if you have not done so already, press star 3 to line up to speak for item 2. madam chair. >> supervisor melgar: we are joined by the sponsor of this legislation, district 2 supervisor stefani. the floor is yours. >> supervisor stefani: thank you for hearing this item today and to supervisors peskin and preston as well. i feel i have been here a lot lately. the item was what i thought was
relatively straightforward item. i hope that's still the case at the end of the presentation. it proposes an amendment to the planning code to allow businesses to have their own business name on both an awning and projecting sign. existing law, and it goes into this in the legislative digest, was passed in the 1980s during the anti blight package of laws meant to beautify neighborhoods across san francisco. businesses out of compliance, those who have the business name on both the awning and projecting sign are mostly located on the west side and in chinatown. although there are businesses scattered throughout san francisco who are out of compliance with this law. this offers a modest change in that it will legalize more
flexibility in how the business sign functions. i'll tell you what it doesn't do. it does not change existing size restrictions on signs city wide, it doesn't change existing elum nations and certainly doesn't allow billboards where they were not previously allowed. 400 businesses across the city have their business name on both and it's all over the city. the reason this came to my attention, during the pandemic, i had a business in district 2 contact me to tell me he was being fined $100 a day by the planning department for being out of compliance while we're forcing them to shut down because he had his business name on both the awning and projecting sign. our planning department was spending resources and enforcing this law to really cost this
business even more harm than it is going through because of the pandemic and because he was out of compliance, charging him $100 a day and the money it would have taken to come into compliance by changing the sign, deciding which one to change was honestly to me unbelievable and i knew i had to do something about it. i want to be clear, the matter before you, i really believe presents a policy choice with respect to how we treat small businesses in the city. the covid-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on small businesses and we have done a lot to help with that at the board of supervisors. we waived business and registration fees for a year, we have made parklets permanent and i think this law will help as well. it would legalize signage for over 400 businesses out of
compliance right now and provide flexibility for future businesses is a common sense solution that will not jeopardize the look and feel of our neighborhoods and not visually pollute our corridors and not degrade our public spaces and not manifest thousands of new signs. i feel like what i have heard is like a sign arm apocalypse is coming. i want to hit this head on, it was mentioned at the planning commission about the grandfathering idea that i'm against and i'll tell you why. we know as i said 400 businesses are out of compliance. first, i believe the law is nonsensical in the first place. it makes no sense to me that we would prohibit a business telling people who they are on the awning and projecting sign. and if we grandfather in just the 400, it creates a two tier
system that is not only hard to keep track of, but at the same time, if you're in new business going into where an old business was that was grandfathered in but now they're going to tell you when you get the permit, by the way, i know that business had its name on the awning and projecting sign but you can't. you can't do that because we only want you to pick one. projecting or awning. that's the only way to have your name on a sign. these signs serve two purposes. an awning, if you're on the other side of the street, is for pedestrians who are across the street and people driving by. a projecting sign is for someone on the same side of the street who is walking toward the business and in a direction.
i truly believe businesses should be allowed to show who they are and where they are to potential customers. the idea that we would charge a small business $100 a day for being out of compliance having their own business name on a projecting sign and awning is absolutely ridiculous. and the other thing i can't believe, if your signage application is denied, you can pay $5688 for reconsideration hearing to the planning department -- who has -- what small business has that kind of money to appeal a sign. when all they're asking for is to have their business name on
an awning and projecting sign that serves two different purposes to show people who they are and where they're at. i urge you to support this legislation as is and to allow businesses to have their business name on both awning and projecting sign. aaron star is here from the planning department. i know the planning department supports the legislation. it got through the planning commission 4-2. the two were about the grandfathering clause. i gave you my reasons why i think we should just change the legislation to make it easy for small businesses and i know that aaron has visuals for a business to have both if anyone wants to see those. with that, i'll turn it back over to you chair melgar and see if you have questions or want to hear from mr. star. >> supervisor melgar: i would not mind hearing from mr. star.
i don't have questions but my colleagues might. do we have questions, colleagues? mr. star? >> i'm just here to tell you that the planning commission heard this october 14th and recommended approval. i do have the deck of slides that we showed and i can show you sort of the mock-ups that the commission requested us to do if you want or not. it's up to you. >> supervisor melgar: i wouldn't mind seeing the mock-up.
>> we took a block, i think this is supervisor peskin's district. but, what they did was added some awnings to it with just the projecting signs. as you can see what it looks like and then they added signage on to the awnings to show what it would look like as well. the commission requested we do this the week prior to get a better sense of what the impact visually would be on that. that is without and with. pretty much -- >> i guess it would be three, without the blade sign -- not that it matters but -- >> correct.
there would be -- without the awning sign, blade sign -- you're right, supervisor. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. any other questions? okay. well, madam clerk, let's go to public comment on this item, please. >> clerk: thank you madam chair. we're checking to see callers in the queue. if you haven't done so already, press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. michael has noted we have nine listeners and five in queue. unmute the first caller, please. >> good afternoon and thank you. i own a business in district 2. thank you supervisor stefani.
i thought the presentation for the planning commission was very successful and having everybody get a good feel for how it is such a small impact. the reality is before the pandemic, our industry was experiencing extinction level event. more restaurants were closing than opening for the first time in san francisco's existence and the pandemic has made it more difficult to survive. one restaurant went through two years of red tape to open and that is brutal. the cost of everything is skyrocketing and i feel like san francisco needs to help small business communities to survive. most neighborhood streets have 33% retail vacancy and we need to make it more in viting. this is one way to do so. we hear about more closures every day. one of the things to survive, as referenced, we need people to know we're here. this is how people see us in a non offensive or intrusive way.
i watch every day, people notice us in different ways and the sign is intensely important to who we are and that we're here. thank you supervisor stefani for sponsoring this, i really appreciate that. we need to make it more simple for us to survive. i look forward to the update. thank you supervisors. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm against the ordinance. first off, there's no evidence that business will increase if this legislation is passed. second, perhaps there should have been a report done -- second, this is really overall a failure from the planning department to enforce their own laws. the law they have on the books
is a good law. however, overtime since the 80s, they have allowed 400 plus businesses to create this signage problem without enforcement and then one person is selected and goes to supervisor stefani. i look at this as a failure of the planning department to enforce their own regulations. what they should do is get rid of those signs. i'm sorry small business. and go back to the original law and enforce it. that way we don't have to keep creating laws because our own agencies can't enforce their own laws. thank you very much.
>> next caller, please. >> thank you. vice president of the small business commission but i'm calling today as a small business owner, part of merchant associations that represent businesses largely affected by broken window error policies. i really commend supervisor stefani for taking a lead on this and hope it sets precedent for getting the old codes off the books in the future. this absolutely targets legacy brick and mortars, businesses that don't own their building that have obstacles to making tenant and facade improvement and problems participating in city programs like sf shine.
they could be corporately sponsored signs, therefore i really encourage the planning department and the board to take the position of a compliance-based approach instead of just punitive. small businesses need the mitigation and support in getting in compliance with these types of codes and laws. thank you. >> supervisor preston: thank you. can we have the next caller, please. >> hello supervisors. i respectfully disagree with the supervisor that this won't bring about a large increase in signage. the last math class i took taught me that one plus one equals a doubling and that's no small matter. also, i worked as architectural draftsman and i can tell you the
art work showed by the planning department is way smaller than the allowable signage. the signs, awnings, the lettering is all smaller than the maximum allowed. please join the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods and groups across town in opposing this ordinance. it would not assist struggling business. telling a small merchant who may be facing bankruptcy and the closing of his or her business you can go out and spend thousands on a new sign is about like telling them they can eat cake. a new sign is not what they need. it would mean a big increase in
sign clutter. this ordinance lists 58 districts where this increase in signage would be allowed. this would undo decades of hard work to reduce sign clutter. it is important to ask why this ordinance is coming forward now. if adding signage was so important to merchants, this matter would have come forward years ago. you heard from jim, this is coming forward because one in district 2 complained -- >> that's your time. next caller please. >> good afternoon. we want to do everything we can
to support small businesses and letting neighbors know what businesses exist seems to be a common sense improvement to the regulations and rules. the fact that you have this small business community speaking up in support here, i think it's a good indication that this is a good idea. and we encourage looking at all of the rules in san francisco that make it harder to create the outcomes we want like building housing or having our small businesses succeed. thank you. >> thank you. can we get the next caller please. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm the president of the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. you have heard from two of our members. with good reasons why this is
bad legislation. i wanted to chime in that if you want to know what the problem with the struggling would be entrepreneurs business people face it's not signage. read heather knight's column in sunday's paper about the trials and tribulations. previously in miami i was the president of the miami dade florida restaurant association. i have been in the business and in the trade and again, the problem is not signage. there are other problems involved. back then when i was in the trade, and here now. and the problem is not what you think it is. thank you. goodbye. >> supervisor melgar: thank you. next speaker and this is the last caller in the queue. if you want to speak for the item, press star 3 and it will indicate to us you have raised your hand to speak.
>> linda chapman, i want to say i think the supervisor is absolutely correct. i think it's a tragedy that such disinformation has been sent around in order to stir up what would you say, alarm about signs. i live in the neighborhood commercial district and i have been a resident for half a century here. i previously lived near union square. i went out and walked around my neighborhood commercial district and half of the stores have signs that would not meet the existing ordinance and no complaints about the signs. good looking signs. even my two favorite restaurants have three signs. a wall sign, awning with a sign and projecting sign and they look great. they are curated as a person who was an architect and designer spoke to the planning commission
only to be told he didn't know what he was doing. just like me. i was -- i spoke about how beautiful powell street used to look, a whole corridor of neon and marquee standing out and one store projected out in the form of a beautiful ship. when i talked about the beautiful neon corridor. people love neon and it is usually projecting. when a business leaves, the neon sign no longer indicates the business coming in and yet some of them have been saved, especially in chinatown. the owner comes and they put a sign that indicates the current business. furthermore, if there's a projecting sign that has the name and attracts attention from the corner, it doesn't tell you what business is going on in
there. he told me i should like it as it is now. he sent me pictures -- >> supervisor melgar: with that, public comment is now closed. colleagues, do we have any questions or issues that we want to raise to supervisor stefani. supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: i just had a question because in the attachments from planning, it said no proposed changes to special sign districts.
the one example that mr. star put up happened to be from jackson square, the city's first historic district. the way if i'm looking at the packet that planning submitted, it looks like it doesn't apply to jackson square or special sign districts. is that right? >> through the chair supervisor, you're correct. we had a difficult time finding a neighborhood commercial district to take a clear photo of. that's why we used it. we had one week to put together. >> supervisor peskin: i just wanted to make sure the example you gave that didn't look like it complied with the map or legislation was just a visual example. thank you. >> just a visual example.
>> supervisor peskin: perfect. so on the map it applies to the various shades and to the rc's in the oranges and the c districts in the greens, correct? >> supervisor melgar: that's a question for you mr. star. >> my many windows hit my unmute button. those are the places it applies to, but i think it only applies to -- only to the chinatown community business district. the other two chinatown districts it doesn't apply to. >> supervisor peskin: i saw language in the legislation it did apply to the chinatown visitor retail, right?
>> it says except in the district, sign copying on permitted awnings or marquees in projecting signs. i don't see visitors district in that. >> supervisor peskin: maybe i made that up. >> i'm sorry, it has different section for that. more than one section for the chinatown. you are correct. >> supervisor peskin: then i didn't make it up. and in the one spot on the map mr. star where you have a special sign district that overlaps with an nc, how does that work? >> the special sign controls. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> you're welcome. >> supervisor melgar: thank you very much supervisor stefani for introducing the legislation. i will be voting to support it.
i think in the world of signage regulation in san francisco and i have to say i am one person who likes the messy clutter. i think it's one of those things that makes our city crazy and creative and great. i love the cows and the jeans and coca-cola signs and all of these things that make for interesting places in the commercial corridors. i know not everybody likes that. some folks like more order but i think the change you are proposing makes sense. it is very small. and i will be supporting it. thank you. >> supervisor stefani: thank you chair melgar. can i correct one thing said during public comment? i just want to reiterate, there's no change to the size restrictions. it is just allowing the business name to be on both projecting
and awning and i have to reiterate, what is really hard to look at in these merchant corridors are empty store fronts. i'd much prefer to see a business name on a projecting sign and awning than the empty store fronts we continue to see in all of the merchant corridors and to do that, we need to make it easier for small businesses just to operate. so i urge your support. >> supervisor melgar: thank you supervisor. colleagues do we have a motion to pass this forward with a positive recommendation to the full board? okay. i will make the motion that we pass it on to the full board with positive recommendation. madam clerk, can you call the roll on that? (roll call)
>> supervisor melgar: that motion passes. thank you supervisor stefani for coming. okay. madam clerk, item three. >> clerk: a hearing regarding muni plans bay 2050 and access and basic service to people with limited mobility and seniors. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on item three should call the number on the screen, 415-655-0001. the meeting id is 2492 276 7226.
then press pound twice after putting in the meeting id. if you haven't done so already, press star 3 to line up to speak for item three. the system prompt will say you have raised your hand. madam chair. >> supervisor melgar: thank you very much. i called for this hearing along with my colleague supervisor mar who is here today. and we wanted to look at policy decisions regarding transportation and housing. before i turn it over to supervisor mar, i wanted to talk a little bit specifically about how this interests me as a district 7 supervisor and supervisor mar as a district 4 supervisor. we are looking at changes in the service plan for muni along with
the housing element. the plan bay area 2050 is coming up and as a city we need to make sure we are making the appropriate planning decisions to have success long-term with all of our plans and we're consistent with how we're approaching things. we need to take into consideration geographic equity in the west side and hear from the partners their commitment to transit and housing particularly for seniors and people with disabilities are consistent with what we're doing in different departments. so, in this presentation, we will hear from doug johnson from the mta. the county transportation authority and the office of resilience and capital planning and we'll have folks from the
department of disability and aging services and oawd available for questions if we have any. and so with that, i will turn it over to supervisor gordon mar from district 4. welcome. >> supervisor mar: thank you for calling for this hearing and pleased to co-sponsor it with you and looking forward to a very important discussion on how we as a city are or are not planning comprehensively to meet the long-term housing and transportation needs, particularly on the west side. this is a really important issue for me as district 4 supervisor. my constituents adding to chair melgar, your comments and i wanted to highlight some of the key findings from the district 4 mobility study, the county transportation authority just completed this summer. and really highlighted the
urgent need to expand transit service on the west side. the study found that there's 345,000 daily weekday trips starting or ending in the sunset district and of those, 76% are driveing trips with 35% being completed with single occupant vehicles. this is among the highest drive mode share rates in the city. we kind of know that, the sunset in the west side is relatively car dependent compared to other neighborhoods and i would add that the study found that the most common destinations, origin points from district 4 were north and south. and these trips are made almost entirely by car.
96% and 83% respectively. so, again, we on the west side are driving a lot and a lot of that reason is not because we love our cars or we have a so-called car culture, but really a lot of it is due to the lack of public transit options and transit service on the west side. that was really highlighted by the study and one of the key recommendations was to expand transit service, particularly north/south on the west side. this is an important conversation especially in light of the planning to increase housing opportunities on the west side as well. thank you chair melgar for linking these two issues and i look forward to the presentations by the departments and discussion. thank you. >> supervisor melgar: thank you supervisor mar. i do remember that one of the
key destinations from district 4 was in district 5, it is that district on the west side, district 1, 4 and 7 is really important. thank you so much. i'll turn it over to the presentations. julie can then call the other presenters. thank you. welcome. >> thank you for having us. before i dive into the presentation, i appreciate that the board chair is here. i think given her time on both the planning commission and our board, she is probably uniquely suited to kick us off. i'll turn to her and then we'll get started. >> thank you. welcome. what a pleasant surprise. thank you. >> thank you supervisor melgar and supervisor mar. i want to thank you for the
opportunity to greet you all today as a former planning commissioner and when i came to sfmta, i was concerned about transportation. we would approve projects without looking at the big picture of where investments were going, where our connections were, what was the speed and reliability with the existing system. were we overloading people in certain areas and neglecting others. i'm excited to have this conversation. the board has been committed to focusing on speed and reliability throughout the city and having a five minute network. as you know, we have gone through a global pandemic and looking at how we scale back and we're trying to make sure we have coverage all over the city in all the key routes and looking at how trips have changed with people traveling more around their neighborhoods to other neighborhoods and not necessarily going downtown. there's been a lot of focus on
those areas. we look forward to working with you as we plan out our future to become the city we want to be. the one focused on our climate, meeting our climate goals and we want to be the city that meets vision zero goals of no traffic fatalities and that place that transit can be a preferred source for anybody in the west side. i lived in the richmond and sunset district without a car actually and it was quite interesting in terms of time to get around. we look forward to working closely with you. we are committed to the issues and i can answer any questions afterward. >> thank you. and i believe doug, are you going to run the presentation for us today? >> that is the goal. >> okay. while you pull that up -- >> i'm looking for my
permission. go ahead julie. >> thank you for the opportunity to present on this important topic. i know we've had a lot of focus in recent months on how we get muni back to what it was and i think having an opportunity to start talking about what it can be and how it supports our really important shared values around equity, climate crisis, economic recovery is wonderful. this presentation has multiple agencies because the work is so complex and so integrated. i really appreciate the opportunity to be here with the transportation authority, the planning department and the office of resiliency and capital planning.
we're going to do quick hand offs during the presentation, any one of them could have given the whole presentation because this really is a shared work product. before i dive into the short term, i do want to talk about what i think is an interesting example of real world example of what we're talking about. as you all know during the pandemic, we have been restoring service based on our equity goals, based on emerging transit patterns and patterns that we know we needed to serve better. we put in place something that had been on the books for two decades because of the capital requirements and other work, it
took this long to get implemented but it is not a surprise with the 22 fillmore as a result of the change is at 100% of precovid ridership on the weekend and over 80% on weekday because there is such a strong connection and synergy between transportation and land use. we are in the process of the restoreration, when we went out and talked to riders, talked to stakeholders, what we heard was a need to restore some key pre-pandemic connections, land use patterns in place for a long time. for example getting people up the hayes street hill to st. mary's. preserving and restoring service in the hilly areas. really focusing first and for
most on people with disabilities and seniors. i appreciate having the department of adult and aging services here today in partnership to speak to that. and then also starting to think about where we need to address frequency. for example, we are recommending a 20% increase in service on the 38 rapid, a corridor quickly outgrowing the service we put in place. it is why corridors like mission street and 8 bayshore in the middle of the day have more service now than they did pre-covid. next slide. so, just for folks listening and might have questions about what is happening in the short term, we do have a lot of great information on the website, sfmta.com/22network. we had the opportunity to present to the gao committee and will be presenting to the ta
board next tuesday. we'll bring recommendations to the mta board for approval on december 7th with the goal of getting the next service in place by february. we're also very much in the process of hiring and working through some of our funding challenges because we would like to continue service restoration into next fall. and then onwards through some of this important more middle term and long-term work. so with that, i do want to make sure we have an opportunity to focus on where we're going next. so it's my pleasure to introduce for the next set of slides. >> thank you julie. i'll quickly dive into the
connected strategy, which i know some of you are familiar with. connect sf pulled together the long range transportation efforts into one coordinated program and one of the important things about connect sf is it integrates land use into the transportation planning efforts. these two areas are related and interdependent. through our partnership, we are identifying a series of major transportation investment and policy strategies moving us forward today into the coming decades. it is important for us to create better transportation outcomes while reducing the ambitions of all the trips that are made. we will need to expand the system to accommodate the growth forecasted to occur throughout san francisco as well as the rest of the bay area which my colleagues from the planning department will discuss later in the presentation. so that leads me to these four
key long-term recommendations. we need to strengthen our existing transit system and prepare it to handle the demands that our returning economy and future groups will place on it. we need a reliable network of bus service. we need to modernize our existing rail system and we need to build rail on the busiest corridors where buses can't provide enough capacity to carry the high volume of riders who need to travel. next slide please. starting with the near term. maintaining and restoring our current system, replacing and repairing our infrastructure and vehicles and addressing multi year backlog of maintenance work. as mentioned, we'll continue to restore transit service reduced due to the pandemic. continuing to focus on routes the riders use the most and increasing coverage of the city.
and the pandemic has shown us that people who rely on transit the most need the systems every where in san francisco, not just downtown. job centers have been emerging outside of the financial district and activities are more disperse throughout the region but historically, focused on one seat rides the downtown. as we rebuild the system, we need to provide reliable trips to all destinations, including north/south and cross town trips and we need to make it easier for everyone to use. and that includes people with mobility limitations such as people with disabilities and seniors and families with children as well. next slide please. we are recommending a network of routes blanketing the city. service would be fast, frequent and reliable. the frequent service would mean
riders only wait a couple of minutes and that expands the number of places people can confidently reach beyond the traditional one seat ride and closes some of the gaps and strengthens the transit network for people who need it the most. i should emphasize that what is shown as primarily infrastructure plan more than a service plan, there a lot of ways the lines on the map could look and something we need to keep working on with community members. regardless, if we implemented the service without building the streets needed to keep the buses moving, they would get stuck in traffic eventually and it would be costly to operate and not deliver a lot of benefit to riders. therefore business and infrastructure program to help make the long-term operations more efficient and more cost effective and more beneficial to riders. next slide please. and to help people make long trips quickly, we'll have a
network of express routes that take advantage of our freeways and potentially express lanes and compliment our rail and ferry routes for longer trips in san francisco and the region, continuing to partner with the other transit operators in san francisco as we have throughout our connect sf work and provide better connectivity and seamless experience. next slide please. we'll continue rebuilding the infrastructure that keeps our trains moving with the goal of running longer trains and providing much more reliable service. our goal is to renew and reenvision our network as a modern rail system, meaning more reliable trains, three or four car trains on the subway and providing subway quality service toward the major destinations
improve safety for riders and improve speed and reliability. being the work is critical for the modern rail system the city depends on. next slide please. this brings us to longer term, decade plus strategies. there are a few places in the city where there are too many passengers for buses to carry. those are the places where we'll need to expand the rail system. what you see here is very much a capacity driven rail expansion plan rather than speed or convenience driven one. these are the places where new rails essential to carrying high volumes of riders likely to see in the coming years.
the rail line on 19th to serve the most crowded bus corridor and connect with some of the busiest destinations on the west side and to downtown and regional rail services. this will improve north/south trips on the west side and provide additional connections from there. next, a new transbay rail crossing, part of the link 21 program, allowing the rail service to go beyond the capacity and increase transit access throughout the bay area and northern california, extending central subway would bring rail service to some of san francisco's most populous
neighborhoods. >> through the chair, i want to note the six minute timer has elapsed. >> thank you. i'll go on to the next slide please. we are also have a plan to reinvest in our streets and as i mentioned earlier, to prioritize transit as well as other sustainable modes of transportation and prioritize safety for all users. we also are going to need to reconnect the communities that have long been separated by widest streets and freeways. next slide please. (please stand by)
have a fiscally constrained transportation investment strategy, which is constrained by the revenues that the region anticipates being through the life of the plan, so 30 years, through 2050. next slide, please. and there's a strong relationship between plan bay area and the county wide transportation plans that are completed by the county transportation authorities. so here in san francisco, that is the san francisco transportation plan or sftp, which alisa is going to be talking about that the
to increase capacity, to meet forecasts increases in demand, making strategic expansions that we talked about, as well. to to support the growth in the city, the current plan bay area that was just passed in september does include all of san francisco's investments in that constrained strategy, including the muni forward train upgrade, things like the treasure island mobile management program, just to name a few of those projects, and we continue to work with the local projects and agencies to ensure that these priorities are advanced, so given the fell infrastructure bill just passed, which is very exciting, but the region's funding goes so far what would be available beyond that bill, we anticipate needing new local revenues as
part of our system to address the growth that's forecasted in san francisco. i mentioned local funding, particularly because that can serve as the seed money or matching funds for federal dollars. so with that, i'm going to pass this off to alisa to talk more about the next iteration of plan bay area. >> thank you, michelle. next slide, please. so just to go over the transportation plan, sftp is our long range transportation plan through 2050. it's updated every four years with plan bay area and provides input into regional and state
plans and funding opportunities. the plan identifies priorities for state and federal funding with an investment plan that considers investment revenues and future revenues. the sftp builds on efforts and identifies funding priorities constrained by revenue estimates. ultimately, the sftp will identify revenue estimates for the investment and vision plans to provide perform i station and investment scenarios and include outreach and engagement to further understand
priorities and scenarios that will shape the scenarios. the investment and vision plans, each of the plans is made up of different types of revenues. so first, there's the committed funds that's shown in the dark green. these are funds with a narrow set of eligible uses or already committed to specific projects. an example of this could be s.b. 1 contributions for street resurfacing. we can't use these for transit. the light green are the discretionary funds. they have the most flexibility in how they can be allocated.
officer for the city, and i realize in this discussion ten years is not enough, and we need to be thinking more broadly, and from the previous presentations that have come before you, we really need to get ahead of these types of issues, otherwise, it's not only challenging for long-term planning and uses resources, it also makes us a lot less resilient. incorporating these long-term plans into work is vital.
resilience. we're responsible for a few plans. in addition to the ten year plan, there's the hazard mitigation plan, and it helps us receive grant funding, mitigation grant funding. we have the commitment for seismic safety, which was the 30-year plan that came out in 2011, which is around how the city is going to become more he resilient to earthquakes and what are we going to do about structures that may potentially collapse or fail during earthquakes, and then, we're coordinating the various efforts. there are 20-plus departments that are working on climate change, but there's a lot of around adaptation and how are we adapting to heat or to sea
level rise and those types of things. next slide. so our capital plan, you know, we're a little bit of a victim of our own success. we approved close to $1.8 billion just in the pass two years. that's record level even for san francisco where we've been pretty aggressive about doing g.o. bonds. $600 million for housing and that has really impacted our capacity in our program to do more bonds, and i'll talk about that in a minute. we've been looking at other funds, so we're using the city's business participation program for recovery stimulus with an emphasis on equity and climate change. we just heard today talk about digital equity program that we put $10 million into to provide -- to provide digital
access, internet access in affordable housing to people around the city. so this shows a general obligation bond program and what we're looking at for the next ten years, and again, the $1.2 billion, you know, in the last capital plan, we were close to $3 billion. i think we were at 2.8 or 2.9 billion. so the recent success means we don't have the capacity. so we need to start thinking about alternative sources or different ways that we may want to approach this cap that we established back in 2006. the cap is shown on this bottom
graph here is this red line, and what that really means is we are limiting the tax rate that can go up when we issue new bonds. this is our general obligation program. bonds in the light gray are already sold and we're paying debt service on. the white, lightish colored ones -- the darkish ones are the ones that voters have approved, and the colored ones is the ones that we're proposing on the list on the chart above. next slide, please. so in terms of thinking about equity and so forth, we have been looking at, you know, these different areas that are showing up in our capital plan. we have a building our future section, and again, i mentioned racial and social equity, but an affordability around how we're addressing housing, climate resilience, earthquake
safety, and infrastructure. part of that is our transportation bond, which will -- which i think is going to be a topic coming up at our planning committee very soon about how we balance those needs. i have another slide, and we're done. we depend on the long range plans, like our city's general plan and the various general plan updates. we're also updating our public safety element. yeah, i mean, our public safety plan element is going to be updated, and these are critical to enable us to be thoughtful about how we're going spend dollars as we go forward. with that, you can go to the next slide. i think i'm done, and happy to take any questions that come up. i think that concludes our entire presentation. i don't think i need to say any
concluding remarks, but thank you all for having us. >> chair melgar: thank you so much. in speaking to supervisor mar, who shared a lot of concerns not just for transportation equity, but concerns for seniors in particular and people with disabilities of which their lots in our communities, in districts 4 and 7. i reached out to folks in the senior disability community about how -- both the long-term plans were affecting folks and how they saw it because, you know, we have adapted a lot of
really old infrastructure to now a.d.a. accessibility, and as we're building new infrastructure, it is much easier if we do it right and accessible to begin with. and so before i, you know, turn it over to you, supervisor mar, you know, i just wanted to bring up kathy deluca who is going to give us some information and an advocate. kathy? >> thank you, supervisor melgar. sasha is a d-7 resident.
she happens to be a resident who has a disability. i live in district 7, and i'm supervisor melgar's representative on the sfmta advisory committee. in terms of taking paratransit, in my experience, it's often late, and sometimes they pick up and drop off two or three other people. public transit is fine. it's not always on time if i want to go downtown, but it can get really burdensome with transfers and steep hills if i want to go to different neighborhoods. i haven't used public transit or paratransit since covid hit, but my schedule is going to change drastically in january,
and i'll need transit that will enable me not having to leave my home drastically early. thank you very much. >> chair melgar: thank you very much, miss deluca. okay. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thanks, chair melgar, and everyone, for the very comprehensive presentations. yeah, i guess i just -- i wanted to maybe focus in on the -- the housing -- the planning for increased housing density citywide and particularly on the west side, and given our rhna allegations
and projects that streamline development. my question is whether -- or around this and knowing this and really accepting this as a given, how are we planning to ensure that this growth is sustainable? actually, maybe i'll start first with the planning department, and i just wanted to see if you could speak a little more to, like, what the current rhna, the current rhna cycle, how that's going to be appropriated citywide and how much of that would be on the west side? i know you showed the highlights that there's going to be some new housing on the
transit corridors. that makes sense, and in single-family, you know, residential neighborhoods, you know, going up to duplexes and quad plexes, but do you have a projection on how much of the 82,000 rhna goal number would be on the west side? >> yeah, i'm happy to say that i'm joined by one of the project managers for the housing element, and i'm hoping kimia might have a good handle on that figure. and i would -- while kimia is hopefully unmuting herself, we know that tens of thousands of units are in that pipeline that stretch into the next decade. but as to distribution, kimia, do you have any information on that? >> sure.
thank you, supervisor, for that question. so as you know, we started a policy for the housing element, and the first draft was released in april of the current year, and the housing element, it's supposed to plan for the rhna, the eight-year cycle of rhna, but it looks at the next 30 years, so the policy has that long-term implication, as well. as far as the policy distribution, that's one of the major policy conservations and the equitable distribution of growth and some of the distributions that's currently under conscious is to establish a goal of 50% of rhna to be
established in areas that are higher resourced. and we have so far considerations around looking at the next two rhna cycles to achieve that goal, and that kind of timeline is something that is, you know, under consideration. i hope that answers your question. >> supervisor mar: yes. thank you, doug and kimia. so you said there's sort of a goal of 50% of rhna allocation be in high resource areas. is that correct? >> yes. currently, it's establishing the goal in the next two rhna cycles, so giving the see a little bit more time to make
sure that that's achieved. we have 70,000 units in the pipeline already, most of that is outside public resource areas. not all of it will be accomplished in the next eight years because some of it is through large scale master plans and development agreements. >> supervisor mar: thank you. so -- so 80 -- so 72,000 units are in the pipeline that could count to our rhna goal? >> close to 70. >> supervisor mar: and can you just explain a little -- i'm trying to understand how the goal of 50,000 rhna units would be in areas to meet the goal.
>> so two cycles of eight years, meaning 16 years. that's kind of halfway through the 30-year time frame of the housing element. >> supervisor mar: so -- so then if for the next rhna cycle that starts in the year 2023, the eight-year cycle, a smaller proportion of the new units in that cycle are in the high-resource neighborhoods, then you're saying in the subsequent cycle, there would need to be more of the units in the high resource areas? >> correct, and i would like to also add that, for the next cycle, each cycle, we have to submit a list of cycles in the city that shows that we have capacity to accommodate that
growth, and for this cycle, it has to show that we have consideration for housing requirements, which means we have to show we have enough sites within the high resource areas to accommodate the affordable housing goals. >> supervisor mar: thank you. yeah, thanks for that. i know this is not really a hearing on the housing element and the rhna planning, it's more focused on we're doing adequate planning for transportation and infrastructure, you know, alongside that, but it's helpful to understand what the numbers look like, particularly on the west side. thank you.
and then, my next question to the t.a. or m.t.a., michelle said that we're planning for a growth of 200,000 residents in san francisco, but especially on the west side, in the high resource neighborhoods, how can we ensure that this -- more residents don't automatically lead to more cars, more congestion, and more emissions, and how are we planning to build our infrastructure and our sustainable mobility infrastructure near these sustainable housing increases, especially on the west side? >> through the chair, supervisor mar, i think that
the city and. t.a., regional densities, are constantly mindful of how we work together to do that. now single funding source, so single agency can really do it, but, for example, the 19 avenue combined city project is an excellent example where multiple city agencies and funding sources came together. this is, of course, not only local major arterial connecting the whole west side with the rest of the region, it's also a state route, so we brought together, for example, local sales tax funds, the city's prior bond -- g.o. bond moneys from m.t.a., caltrans, i
believe, has funds on it from the public works. so we've got sfmta, sfpuc, municipal transportation authority. i'm probably leaving others out, but we're working to ensure we not only improve the road condition but the utilities under neath, the transit and sidewalk both where we're letting pedestrians and passengers have a safe place to wait for the bus and to shorten the crossing distance from one side of the street to the other. it's a multisector approach, and we are doing this, as well, on the great highway, particularly the lower extension that has a whole system impact that yourself and supervisors melgar and chan have pointed out that it's really a whole network, so that whole area has to be
coordinated with sloat, lincoln, and to brotherhood and ultimately 280. all of these efforts touch each other, and that's the kind of medium term planning that gets updated every few years, and we appreciate the input of yourself and the community to make sure that we're doing this efficiently and effectively, and that none of this is working in a vacuum. >> yeah, i agree -- this is julie kirchbaum. i agree with what tilly is saying. you have to get the big details right, and you have to get the small details right, and that can only come through really careful collaboration. it means that investing in our major corridors and continuing to build out things like the
geary network, and i think we have been successful at partnerships because so many of the agencies here are united on values and goals, but we need to continue that as well as continue the funding piece that brian raised for the committee to succeed. >> supervisor mar: thanks. thanks so much, julie and tilly. doug, did you have something? >> yeah, i would just add, i think have a transportation element, it's important that we have a policy framework that's going to help us reach not only our mobility goals but on you climate goals. julie's example of a curb cut
is a great example of not forgetting very fine details make a huge decision in cumulative. >> supervisor mar: great. thanks. just -- i -- just one follow up question. i guess i'm concerned about the time -- the sequencing of this work, the transportation planning and also the housing planning and just wanting to make sure that they're in synch, and it seems -- that from my perspective, i actually think it's more important that we make sure that we have the proper increased investments in transportation service and infrastructure even before the housing -- the new housing is developed, and before that, the new infrastructure that's needed, particularly on the
west side and the high resource neighborhoods. so yeah, like -- yeah, like, you mentioned the geary rail and subway line, and i think that's something that supervisor melgar has been championing, and i think that's an incredibly important project, but that's also very long-term and decades away, and there's already, you know, a deficit of transit service and transportation options on the west side. therefore, you know, that our residents are, you know, you know, you know, are very car dependent right now, and so i guess i'm just concerned that the transportation investments and the infrastructure investments are not going to happen, you know, quickly enough, you know, and -- and it's going to lead to more cars on the street, more congestion, and -- and emissions, you know,
contributing to the climate crisis. >> chair melgar: thank you very much, supervisor mar. so i had a question of some of the nuts and bolts of how this very high level planning works. like you, supervisor mar, i worry about our existing infrastructure not being enough, let alone the one that's coming, in particular seniors and people with disabilities have much lower rates of car ownership than other folks in the west side even, and so i do worry that, you know, we will exacerbate -- and people think that everybody on the west side is wealthy, and that's far from the truth. we have populations of folks that are, you know, very low-income and, you know, folks who are socially disconnected, and i want to make sure that in the sort of nuts and bolts of how we are operationalizing
these long-term plans that we are addressing those issues. so for example, we are planning a low-income senior housing project at laguna honda on the laguna honda campus, to start doing those designs, very close to the forest hill muni station, and yet, the very steep, you know, walk up that hill is not quite doable. so i'm wondering, when those kind of things are proposed, what is the specific collaboration of, say, the -- you know, the m.t.a. with the planning department, the mayor's office of housing. when the r.f.p. is put out, how do we make sure all of these
policies happen and the points system that's given out for financing or, you know, and the service changes that are being proposed by the m.t.a.? i think that's just one example, but i want to understand when we're operationalizing the things that we do in development, how does that happen? >> so i'll take a first bit at this, but i have a feeling that my friends at m.t.a. will have more to say. at planning, we have the street development team that gets together to look at the specifics of a given site, but then also with a site like laguna honda, there's going to be a group of folks from planning and m.t.a. looking at accessibility and design of the
site to ensure that there's transit access but also safe paths of travel for all road and sidewalk users. i think that geography do play a big role, much that some of the sites that we've worked on are close to the edge of the bay. so there is a team of staff that worked together to try and tackle both big and small issues. julie's example of a driveway, that is where a driveway, you know, gets sorted out because that driveway not only affects the bus, it affects the folks using the sidewalk trying to get to the bus. >> i could add a little bit from the m.t.a. side, as well. as doug mentioned, we were one
of the core [indiscernible] to make sure that all of the elements are designed around it. we actually can get funding for -- to cover some of the costs of affordable housing protection as well as street improvements around it to create accessible paths of travel to transit stops, you know, groceries, other community services, and the like. so we have had some success in recent years, and winning those grants and being able to produce the housing and the surrounding street improvements
at the same time. >> chair melgar: thank you so much. so my last question, it's basically the same question but to the c.t.a. and how that works in interjurisdictional planning. so one of the things that i'm excited about, which is not going to happen in my lifetime but i think has tremendous possibility is the expansion of b.a.r.t., possibly, to that second tunnel. we just had this little jurisdictional issue, which is getting [indiscernible] station on the b.a.r.t. in daly city could take that very short bike ride to the campus. it's just, like, one little thing can be so complicated. so i'm wondering how, you know, what you're talking about, that involved funding because part of your presentation was about
ferries, about b.a.r.t., about all of the other, you know, multicounty systems. >> sure. thank you so much, chair melgar, and again, my other partners at the other agencies will probably join in, but we are all used to working together at multiple agencies, as well. it may not seem clear how these things work, but we're in constant communication. i know, for example, my counterparts in the 101, we've been working on caltrain and highways on u.s. 101 for many years now, trying to ensure we have carpool and bus lanes for muni and sam trans. i know that director -- transit director kirchbaum as well as general manager and director
tumlin are in constant communication with their counterparts with the county transportation agencies in san mateo and santa clara, and we are meeting constantly. whether there's an issue, we have the capacity to coordinate. now being able to actually get the work done in a timely fashion really can depend. it can depend on if everyone has the same priorities, and certainly, when you're coordinating on various bodies such as m.t.c. and abag, that does help a lot. so sometimes any effort can benefit, right, from coordination at the staff level but especially at the policy level. something like the b.a.r.t. station should not require your time, and we should be able to work on that, and in the future, don't hesitate to call on us, and we'll do so. thank you. >> i can also add another
representative example to what tilly said. on the transit investment strategy, we meet bimonthly with the link 21 staff from b.a.r.t. and capital corridor to coordinate our efforts since they are pretty much very much much -- they are very much in a planning and outreach stage right now. similarly, we met with all of the transit agencies as we worked on the development of the strategy, and i should mention that a lot of these strategies do cross many agencies. >> chair melgar: thank you, mr. rashida. any other questions,
colleagues? supervisor preston? >> supervisor preston: yes, thank you, chair melgar. forgot to put my name in the chat. obviously, covered a lot of ground, and thank you for, i think, probably lots of questions all of us have on each of these issues, but there were, i guess just a couple of comments or questions i did want to make. and one is something -- and i don't want to repeat things that i said in other settings, but i just want to flag this discussion that's been in a number of presentations around the five-minute network. there's a saying that chair borden mentioned, that mr. rashida talked about, that t.a. staff have talked about. and i continue to have a concern not about the idea of a five-minute network, not about the idea of buses coming every five minutes, but about what i think are not presented in
about that plan, which is a set of assumptions, i think, that i think can be problematic. so when i think folks are talking about transportation, they're not talking about -- they're not focusing on trip length, they're not focusing on the elimination of one-seat rides, which is a problem for, you know, the seniors and the disabled folks in particular, and so, you know, folks on the west side right now may be able to get on a bus, the number 7, and go all the way downtown. if you change that, you're forcing transfers. and also, what i think is something that we as a board have really taken a strong stand on, which is to make sure that the five-minute network idea, this core line idea, is not coming by sacrificing service on other lines, that
we're just -- that we are building out the capacity of our core lines and frequency but not doing so at the expense of the rest of our system and some of the lower ridership lines that i want to elevate that are very important not just my district, but heavy transit. but some of the lower ridership lines are in my colleagues' districts. they're in supervisor melgar's districts, they're in supervisor mar's districts, and they're extremely important. i just want to say that one of the challenges of transit planning in a city where we have district elections and we each have our own corner of the city that we're looking to support, we have our own transportation, and it matters
how people on the west side and the south side of the city get around. the biggest source of traffic in my district is people coming to the freeway from other parts of the city, right, that are coming in on oak and coming out on sell, and it's important to get as many people as possible on public transportation. when i hear this is recommended -- like, this is not an approved plan with the details actually laid out of whether we are drawing trips away from certain things to serve other lines, whether we are eliminating one-seat rides, and all of these things are very real issues, particularly for senior and disabled riders. i think it sounds great that when we get to our bus stop, we don't have to wait more than
five minutes, but let's be aware that it's not been unveiled, it's a part of all of these presentations. and then, just one other thing, and i think this has come up. it's just that some of our muni lines are really overburdened already, so i appreciate this discussion around, you know, looking at things like hub rezoning and ucsf, which is our districts, chair melgar, and looking at a greater scale of density in some of these projects to make sure that we're ahead of the curve when it comes to transportation needs, not chasing it as an after thought, which i think this kind of discussion and the planning, it helps. but i think too often, the housing plan is done a little bit in isolation from real commitments and tangible plan
>> so that's what this real opportunity to redesign our streets and redo the transit lanes and that's where it's going to make a difference. we plan on getting together with the planning commission as well but the real idea is more aspirational and making sure we should become a transit-approved city. as i mentioned, i went all the way out to 48th and lincoln. it took me longer to get to downtown san francisco than it did for them. with that in mind, we do know we really want our network to achieve those goals so that people will get out of their cars and buses can get moving. >> supervisor melgar: thank you so much. chair borden.
okay. colleagueses, any other supervisors or colleagues questions? thank you so much. i would like to make a motion that we file this hearing. >> clerk: through the chair, i believe we have to take public comment on this. >> chairman: i'm sorry. of course. thank you. yeah. let's go to public comment, madam clerk. >> clerk: all right. we're checking to see if we have callers in the queue. if you have not done so already, express star three to be entered into the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. so we have twelve listeners and seven in the queue. michael, if you can unmute the first caller, please. >> caller: i can't believe
this. this gross, gross, gross without barely any reference to seniors or people with disabilities, thank you, chair melgar for mentioning that, for bringing this to light. for bringing in notion of tributaries and all the people in those little dotted areas. i resent this notion that we're returning things to the hilly areas. balogne. and supervisor mar, i'm glad it was extended back and returned to d4. >> chairman: did we lose our caller, madam clerk? >> clerk: it must be a connection issue because i hear her coming in and out.
>> caller: can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. go ahead. >> caller: okay. may i continue and have time added to that. as far as aspirations. because my neighbor got a car. so much for car-free and the projections, good god. the gray is coming. every single census has exploded. the senior population is just down the street. all this talk about getting this one and that one to work and this also. >> that has been -- i shop on
mission street. i can't get there. neither can my neighbors. and it's an outrage to see it on clipper street. it's a waste of gas, it's a waste of drinks. it's highly polluting. it's twice as the gradient is twice as steep on this supposed shrt cut that gives 20 -- >> clerk: thank you, michael. let's move on to the next speaker. each speaker will have fwochlt minutes. so we'll move on after the two-minute mark. >> caller: hello. i'm a senior and i live in district eight and we've been neglected as the previous caller was mentioned. the 48 bus no longer travels along the route to pick up the
passengers that it used to and here i am on the j. church line right by 24th and church street, i can't get downtown without having to call a friend to get their car out of the garage to take me some place or take a taxi which costs money and that's more than i can afford right now. so it's -- we have option two, i hope we vote for option two for the winter '22 service plan because it's the only option that centers concerns on persons with disabilities and seniors and prioritizes coverage over frequency. it's really important that we get the green house gases under control for climate change. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please.
we have six in queue. >> hi, this is the advocacy director with transit riders. i love this conversation about what muni and our transportation system can be. thank you for leading this conversation. i also want to acknowledge sfmta for managing a difficult situation during the pandemic and for riders across the city to ensure access for those with the least mobility. to restore muni. let alone expand the service we need to manage these roads and meet our equity and climate goals. so in addition to sales tax, the authorization and transportation geo bond, we need a progressive transportation funding measure to fund muni operations in 2022 and beyond.
in terms of transit planning. i'm thank you comments were shared today, but in part because we have not succeeded in centering riders like her in the process. i've been hardened by that finally, in terms of future that means investment in transit priority and infrastructure and quick build improvements and riders across the city will benefit.
this is a core part of not only defining the network. that gets you across the city in 30 minutes or less by 2030. thank you. >> clerk: thank you so much. we have eleven listeners with five in queue. >> caller: good afternoon. i'm christopher peterson. a district 7 resident. thank you for holding this hearing on the relationship between land use and transportation. i'd like to make three points. first, muni is crucial to the functioning of the city, but it's long-term funding is extraordinarily precarious. i urge the board to strongly support new reliable long term funding that's sufficient to support not only stored services but increased level of transit service.
second, as a d7 resident and who also frequently rides north, south, bus routes such as the 29 and the 43 to other districts such as districts one, four, and five, i'm intimately familiar with the weaknesses of those parts of the system. third, the board must also support housing in order to provide the ridership to sustain frequent transit service. given the number one green house gases in san francisco and better service on those corridors is essential for the city to effectively address the climate crisis. thank you.
>> clerk: thank you so much. next speaker, please. >> caller: thank you very much for the time to address you all. my name is margarett crash and i live in district four. i am a senior and the comments that i've heard are very applicable. i'm encouraged to hear about the plans being set forth, but i want to speak very much about planning per se. and i'm going to give you a bad example. when covid hit and all the buses were being rerouted and everything, there was a plan in district four to have the l-car which is the lifeline of district four carrying it from the zoo to west portal to downtown. the plan that came out from mta initially would have caused those of us who live on the far
west side to be involved and have to undertake three separate boardings. that means, the user would have to walk to their stop, board a bus, get off at sunset boulevard, take another bus up to west portal, once more get off, unboard and wait to get the train downtown. now, that meant for seniors with their walkers, with a cane, with their wheelchairs, in the rain, in the cold that would have been extremely burdensome. and to its credit, mta after a flurry of letters from me, but also i think more particularly
after supervisor mar's input to change that plan. i think from the end use or the consumer's point of view. i think particularly when they come to seniors and persons with disabilities and it seems to me it would be a very common sense thing for someone when they put the plan in place actually go out and try it and then think about people with disability. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker please. we have four in queue. >> caller: linda chapman. i'm so grateful to hear some consideration by the people giving this hearing. last week, i was at a town hall of csfn and the subject came up in both cases that mta and the other hearings, there's very
little representation usually as elders and disabled people. the people who know about the online surveys are the organized people like the bicycle coalition. so they all call in and if somebody like me comes along and tries to speak for seniors or families with small children, you know, we get called out. people will call in and say, well, you know, if you were smart, those little toddlers and your disabled mother would have learned to drive bicycles like us. they actually called in and said that i mean, it's just heartless, the disconsideration. i as a child of a polio mother walking her small amount. her ticket to freedom was having a car with a hand control and i was a long time
even so. i didn't realize i developed a spinal cord problem. the agony of going each step where the bus stop wasn't where it used to be because they consolidated bus stops and whatnot. the muni, why would you want to do that. you can have lines like the two and the three that are convenient for other people. it really makes a difference when you have to go way uphill. van ness now, i protested and so did the planning commission. blocks apart. >> clerk: thank you, ms. chapman.
we have four in queue. next speaker. >> caller: good afternoon again supervisors. this is cathy deluca. i work with community living campaign and we serve older adults and adults with disabilities in the city. the majority of whom live on the west side. we're super excited to see more housing opportunities in the city, but making sure folks can travel safely to and from that housing is vital and making sure service providers can come to those houses to give in-home services is vital. i've heard from so many older adults and folks with disabilities during the pandemic when muni service was cut back. i heard things like i am stranded in my home. i would have never moved to this neighborhood if i knew there wouldn't be a bus. i heard people say i can't transfer to another bus, it's just too hard. i've heard folks say i can't get anyone to come to my home
to help me because there's no bus. folks have said, i can't walk to the bus because i can't get up and down that hill with my walker. most of the seniors and people with disabilities that i work with aren't transportation professionals like me. they don't get updates or communications. many of them aren't even online. so they didn't know what was happening with the cut-backs. they have a hard time, many of them following what's being planned. community organizations like mine try to help out, but it's difficult. so i think outreach to older adults and people with disabilities needs a major overhaul and i would urge all the city agencies here, today listening and not listening to invest in and practice community codesign. plan with older adults and folks with disabilities as an equal partner and that's how we'll best be able to serve all of our residents.
thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: supervisors, good afternoon. this is lorraine petty, resident of district 5, the fillmore and i am a senior. i might urge the supervisors to take care of our community based needs now and in the near future before worried about the region and future commuters. the problem to hold off changes and new routes until covid patterns emerge and until muni develops the capability of outreach that overcomes a digital divide. i believe it's important to know that muni has stated a priority and people with disabilities.
the actions are failing us. of its seniors disabled. so low-income riders and people of color. and it was only brought back after a huge public outcry. it was brought back, but it was missing, its final third route. now, it's in a different market requiring a transfer up to market street. for 31 balboa to the cal train station. it's going to be restored by never again going out clement
street. [inaudible] -- by removing the downtown half of its route. contrary to -- >> clerk: thank you. thank you so much. next speaker. we have two left in queue. again, if you would like to speak, you just need to press star three. >> caller: hello. i'm a member of the san francisco transit rider and i'd like to thank everyone for this hearing and also emphasize we just don't have then funding to bring back muni and it's not realistic to expect the income ridership from muni or just to
rely on these. we really need a different source of funding to have muni that covers what we think is so important in terms of getting people with mobility options, access to transportation i think we're realizing the routes people need are changing and it's important we don't just close routes before we really try to improve again, none of this investment.
>> clerk: thank you so much. this is the last caller in the queue. >> caller: hi. good afternoon, supervisors. i'm with sf transit riders right now we don't have the funds to bring back 100% of pre-pandemic service and need to go well beyond that in order to meet equity goals and accommodate for housing. and, yeah, we need a funding measure beyond the sales tax and the transportation go bond which is progressive and would really bring in substantial operating funds for muni and i live in district seven and i do
think we need to emphasize transit connectivity across town including between neighborhoods. >> clerk: thank you, caller. madam chair, that concludes the queue. >> chairman: thank you. public comment is now closed. thank you, colleagues, for allowing us to hear through all of these issues. it is clear that we as a city and county have big dreams and our transportation ambitions is related to our job growth and we must look at it in that context in that not looking at it in that context puts pressure on people who are the
most vulnerable. i am grateful to supervisor mar for partnering on these very important issues and on making sure that we push the policy discussion and also hold our agencies accountable to those dreams into putting collectively our money where our mouth is to fund our existing public transportation system and our future dreams. so, with that, i don't know if you want to say any final words, supervisor mar, before we file this hearing. >> supervisor mar: i just briefly wanted to thank you, again, chair melgar and all the presenters from the department and also everyone who called in from public comment. i really appreciated the wide range of important points that you all made and especially the folks, the seniors, and people with disabilities. that's the need for us as a
city and especially sfmta to meaningfully engage with you and ensure your needs are included. so i agree with that. and i also wanted to highlight that, we have a hearing coming up in land use and transportation committee on how the city's planning to meet the comprehensive full spectrum of housing needed. i think a lot of the discussion we had today, the need to integrate planning will be apart of that too. so thank you. >> chairman: thank you very much, supervisor mar. madam clerk, i have made a motion to file this hear, please. take the roll on that. >> clerk: on the motion to file item number three, [roll call]
>> chairman: that will motion passes. thank you very much, madam clerk. please call item number four. >> clerk: item number four is an ordinance amending the planning code to lot number 002 as a landmark custodin't with the standard set forth in the article code. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on that item call the number on the screen. if you have not done so already, please press star 3 to line up to speak and the system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand and thank
you supervisor peskin for introducing this item. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. i would like to make a motion to table this item, colleagues. >> so, with that, madam clerk, can we go to public comment on this item. >> clerk: yes. we have -- >> chairman: go ahead. >> clerk: we have michael checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. if you have not done so, press star three to be added to the queue. michael has noted we have three listeners, but 0 in queue. >> chairman: okay. with that, public comment on this item is closed. supervisor peskin, that was the
motion? >> supervisor peskin: yes. >> chairman: all right. madam clerk, please call the roll on that motion. >> clerk: [roll call] you have three ayes. >> chairman: thank you. the item's tabled. are there any other items on our calendar, madam clerk? >> clerk: that concludes the business for today. >> chairman: great. thank you so much everyone. we're adjourned.
>> in 201,755.7 million passengers traveled through san francisco international airport. we have on average 150,000 people traveling through the airport every day. flying can be stressful so we have introduced therapy dogs to make flying more enjoyable. the wag brigade is a partnership between the airport and the san francisco therapy animal assistant program to bring therapy animals into the airport, into the terminals to make passenger travel more enjoyable. i amgen fer casarian and i work here at san francisco international airport. the idea for therapy dogs got started the day after 9/11. an employee brought his therapy dog to work after 9/11 and he
was able to see how his dog was able to relieve passenger's jitter. when we first launched the program back in 2013, our main goal was to destress our passengers however what we quickly found is that our animals were helping us find a way to connect with our pang. passengers. we find there are a lot of people traveling through the airport who are missing their pets and who are on their road a lot and can't have pets and we have come in contact with a lot of people recently who have lost pet. >> i love the wag brigade. >> one of my favorite parts is walking into the terminals and seeing everybody look up from their device, today everybody is
interacting on their cell phone or laptop and we can walk into the terminal with a dog or a pig and people start to interact with each other again and it's on a different level. more of an emotional level. >> i just got off an 11.5 hour flight and nice to have this distraction in the middle of it. >> we look for wag brigade handlers who are comfortable in stressful situations. >> i like coming to airport it's a lot of fun and the people you talk to are generally people who are missing their dogs. >> they are required to compete a certification process. and they are also required to complete a k9 good citizen test and we look for animals who have experienced working with other organizations such as hospitals
and pediatric units and we want to be sure that the animals we are bringing into the airport are good with children and also good with some of our senior travelers. i think toby really likes meeting kids. that is his favorite thing. he likes to have them pet him and come up to him and he really loves the kids. >> our wag brigade animals can be spotted wearing custom vets and they have custom patches. >> there is never a day that repeats itself and there is never and encounter that repeats itself. we get to do maximum good in a small stretch of time and i have met amazing people who have been thrilled to have the interaction. >> the dogs are here seven days
a week, we have 20 dogs and they each come for a two hour shift. >> there is a lot of stress when people have traveling so to from these animals around to ease the stress and help people relax a little bit. i think it's great. >> one of our dogs has special need and that is tristine. he wears a wheel around. >> he has special shoes and a harness and we get it together in the parking lot and then we get on the air train. he loves it. little kids love him because he is a little lower to the ground so easy to reach and he has this big furry head they get to pet and he loves that. >> he doesn't seem to mind at all. probably one of the happiest dogs in the world.
>> many people are nervous when they travel but seeing the dogs is just a wonderful relief. >> what i absolutely love most about it is the look on people's faces, so whenever they are stressed and flying is stressful these days you get these wonderful smile. >> i am the mom of lilo the pig and she is san francisco's first therapy pig. >> lilo joined the wag brigade as our first pig. >> wag brigade invited us to join the program here and we have done it about a year-and-a-half ago. our visits last 1.5 to 2 hours and it does take a little bit
longer to get out of the terminal because we still get a lot of attention and a lot of people that want to interact with lilo. >> i feel honored to be part of the wag brigade. it's very special to meet so many people and make so many feel happy and people that work here. it's been a great experience for me and a great experience for to toby. >> it's been an extremely successful program, so the next time you are here, stop by and say hi. hi, i'm lawrence. we ar
doing a special series about ar staying safe. let's look at issues of water and sewer. we are here at the san francisco urban center on mission street in san francisco and i'm joined today by marrielen from puc and talk about water and sewer issues. what are things we should be concerned about water. >> you want to be prepared for that scenario and the recommendation is to have stored 1 gallon per person per day that you are out of water. we recommend that you have at least 3-5 days for each person and also keep in consideration storage needs for your pets and think about the size of your pets and how much water they consume. >> the storage which is using
tap water which you are going to encourage. >> right. of course at the puc we recommend that you store our wonderful delicious tap water. it's free. it comes out of the tap and you can store it in any plastic container, a clean plastic container for up to 6 months. so find a container, fill it with water and label it and rotate it out. i use it to water my garden. >> of course everyone has plastic bottles which we are not really promoting but it is a common way to store it. >> yes. it's an easy way to pick up bottles to store it. just make sure you check the label. this one says june 2013. so convenient you have an end date on it. >> and there are other places where people have water stored in their houses. >> sure. if you have a water heater or access to the water heater to your house, you can drink that water and you can also drink the water that the
in the tank of your toilet. ; not the bowl but in your tank. in any case if you are not totally sure about the age of your water or if you are not sure about it being totally clean, you can treat your water at home. there is two ways that you can treat your water at home and one is to use basic household bleach. the recommendation is 8 drops of bleach for ever gallon of water. you add 8 drops of bleach into the water and it needs to sit for 30 minutes. the other option is to boil water. you need to boil water for 5-10 minutes. after an earthquake that may not be an option as gas maybe turned off and we may not have power. the
other thing is that puc will provide information as quickly as possible about recommendations about whether the water is okay to drink or need to treat it. we have a number of twice get information from the puc through twitter and facebook and our website sf water.org. >> people should not drink water from pools or spas. but they could use it to flush their toilets if their source are not broken. let's look at those issues. >> sanitation is another issue and something people don't usually or like to think about it but it's the reality. very likely that without water you can't flush and the sewer system can be impeded or affected during an earthquake. you need to think about sanitation. the options are
simple. we recommend a set up if you are able to stay in your building or house to make sure that you have heavy duty trash bags available. you can set this up within your existing toilet bowl and once it's used. you take a little bit of our bleach. we talked about it earlier from the water. you seal the bag completely. you make sure you mark the bag as human waste and set it aside and wait for instruction about how to dispose of it. be very aware of cleanliness and make sure you have wipes so folks are able to wash up when dealing with the sanitation issue. >> thank you so much,
>> my name is marcia conraers and i'm with mission housing development. one of the co-developers for the balboa upper yard, alongside related companies. i would like to welcome everyone to the groundbreaking ceremony for the balboa park upper yard. we are excited that you have set time aside to join us and to alongside related companies. i would like to welcome everyone to the groundbreaking ceremony for the balboa park upper yard. we are excited that you have set time aside to join us and to
celebrate along with us. we're standing on the ground where in about approximately two years from now, about 130 units of affordable housing will rise -- yes, thank you. thank you for the signal. are we excited about that? 130 units are coming to this wonderful space. the balboa upper yard has truly been a community effort. for well over a decade, members of the san francisco diverse district 11, my personal district that i'm so proud of, have come together and organized to ensure this plot of land here would one day become affordable housing. and today we celebrate together the efforts of numerous advocates, leaders, financial partners, countless people who have touched this project and shown what happens when we -- and i'm going to repeat -- when we, all of us, come together and put the land in the community's hands. isn't that true? yes, where is our community? [applause] we have a lot to celebrate today
so let's get started. one of our first speakers is one that i know very well. and i have the opportunity to work very closely these past 10 years. we have worked tirelessly, along with our team, to see that this dream became a reality. which is basically to build affordable housing in my district, district 11. can you please help me to welcome our executive director sam moss to the podium. [applause] >> thanks, everybody, i'll keep it short. we are standing on a parking lot right now that will be 130 units of affordable housing in under 10 years and i want everyone to take a moment to think about that. we have space in san francisco to build affordable housing for our low-income communities. we have lots of space. there are a lot of parking lots just like this all over the city. and there's undeveloped land all over the city. so whenever someone tells you that people just need to move
away, that there isn't enough room, just point them to this place, because we are proving that the highest and best use for land in the city is probably housing our most needing citizens. i want to thank related california, bill witty and sylvia. without you, mission housing would never have been able to take a lead like we have in this project. we have rebuilt ourselves over the last 10 years and it is exciting to take the next step. i'd like to thank senator scott wiener and sb-35, with which we would not be where we are in the time that we are. but more important i would like to thank the district 11 community, cusj, and omi, everyone. without you, we wouldn't be here today. since 2008 you have been pushing for affordable housing at this spot and i'm just really excited for everyone to get a chance to celebrate. because affordable housing is the best. so thank you very much. and with that i'd like to introduce jamie from the ymca.
>> hello, everybody. what a great day. i want to center my comments on a powerful word that you're going to hear hopefully over and over again today. and that word is "yes." so many times we hear in this city about, no, no we can't do it, no, we can't dream big enough. but today is about a yes. and imagine the hope and optimism of that day. think in your head of the many times that you said yes to something and you opened yourself up to, yes, we can have community input, yes, we can do this. we can take a land that needs to be brought back to affordable housing, and really make it powerful. thank you for making that happen. and so let's center on one word and that is "yes." and thank you for that. and it matters. why does yes ma effort? the soul of the city depends how we treat our most vulnerable and this is a site that's going to be a treasure for the most vulnerable in our community. 100% affordable housing.
can we say that -- 100% affordable housing on this site access to transit. and the balboa mission terrace neighborhood, incredible work to the power of yes. and also youth development. we'll have over 6,000-square-foot youth development center in this site so that every child that walks through the threshold of those doors understands the power of yes and how we came together and how the community came together, elected officials came together, partners, our faith-based ministry, and pastor ralph. we came together to say yes, yes, yes, over and over again and we have more yes to go. and i am proud of the partnership and the community input to make it happen. the future is bright here today i want to thank mayor breed for her vision. senator as well for his vision to allow us to come together on behalf of the ymca, and thank you for your work and your support. and, sam moss, thank you for your words earlier today. so today is all about yes.
thank you all. [applause] >> thank you, jamie. and that is a yes for me. the community partners like the ymca are going to be able to provide strong programming here for our residents at the balboa park upper yard and we're excited about that. but now i want you to bring to the front an amazing group of folks. and i am going to make sure that i pronounce this correctly because i was trained earlier today. this district is very diverse and we have a lot of different cultures in district 11. and today we're going to be welcoming a dialect to the front. and it places indigenous music from the southern philippines as well as their own compositions. they are a homegrown group here in district 11, and they are going to be providing some entertainment so that we can learn more about their culture. so welcome.
>> wasn't that wonderful? can we give them another round of applause? [applause] thank you, thank you for joining us today and allowing us to enjoy this wonderful music. so now to lead us in a prayer and a blessing, i would like to welcome pastor ralph howard of the baptist church. pastor howard and his family have been a religious pillar in this community for the past 50 years. helping us to lead with gratitude, pastor howard will lead us with a few words and a blessing for us today.
>> surely, it is an honor for us to be able to join in this occasion, for the work that has been done and what we are all about to witness and take part in will be a legacy that will stand for the generations. as pastor of paradise baptist missionary church our congregation has been privileged to serve this community for now over 70 years. we've been located right here on san jose avenue for 55 years. and the changes that have occurred over that period of time have helped to strengthen our community and to bring us together, recognizing that god has created us, not only to be equal, but also to grow, prosper, and to care for one another.
one of the great commandments which was asked of the lord by a person who wanted to know how can you please god -- the lord responded, there is a great commandment, thou shall love thy lord thy god with all of thy soul and all thy might. and thou shall love thy neighbor like thyself. he said on these two hinge all of the laws and the prophets. truly the things that we are able to do to help to provide for housing meets that challenge. i have been asked to share a prayer, a prayer of blessing, for not only those who are soon to reside here, but a blessing on our community for what is taking place here is truly a reminder that we all have common needs. a need for food, a need for
shelter and a need for love. in the book of hebrews in the 3rd chapter the words of the bible declare, "for every house is built by someone, but god is the builder of every thing." with that let us pray. lord god, as we come to this appointed time, we are eternally grateful that you have provided for us the resources, the wisdom, the means, by which to care for our fellow man. lord, you have provided every one of us, dear god, with resources and to please you, you have required that we share with those who have need. so, dear god, we pray that this
building, this house, which will house many families, will be a refuge of safety. we pray, dear god that, in this place those who reside here and those who pass through here and those who come to be served by the various activities here will grow into the persons that they are meant to be. persons of dignity. persons of integrity. persons who have your favor. so we thank you today for this the result of a job well done. god we thank you and give you honor. bless this land and this place. amen. [applause]