Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    December 21, 2010 7:00pm-7:30pm PST

7:00 pm
whether you are a master tenant for a roommate. that is what we want in order to leave here. how about $1.5 million for everyone? [applause] commissioner miguel: thank you, your time is up. [unintelligible] laura traveller, lee, pallejo, howard strassner, larsen. line up in the aisle in order that i am calling you. garfield cpowell,
7:01 pm
michelle diamond. >> we are ready. good evening. i am lara traveller. i have been in parkmerced for over 26 years. i have made presentations to the planning commission before. i can start off with the same statement. i am totally against this developer's idea of redevelopment. anytime you are going to stand up and demolish 1596 town homes that are the homes of people who
7:02 pm
live here, something is wrong. i think we have heard one of the major reasons that is wrong. it is about greed and money only. [applause] people who are seniors, as myself, people who are disabled, people who are trying to raise their families here because of the horrible rent that exists throughout the city. they are living here. somewhere along the line, this board has to recognize that
7:03 pm
we're talking about human beings. we're talking about human beings as well as their homes. these developers think they can be destroyed in one fell swoop. is horrible. -- it is horrible to even think that way. it is far from the loud beaches where he goes fishing and crying. why is the sea gulls flying the decline as he flies over -- why is the siegel crying as he flies over parkmerced? he is crying for the same reason we are. routes and homes are being possibly destroyed.
7:04 pm
there the very places that the sea gull can land. these are our homes. we are not going to stand by and see them destroyed for greed. that is the only word that covers it. thank you very much. [applause] >> good evening, commissioners. i am speaking for the sierra club. we wrote you a long comment on the eir. our main concern is the way you evaluate those eir's. people drive from land-use to land use. that is not true. they drive from parking place to parking place. you cannot drive if you do not have a parking place.
7:05 pm
when you evaluate the project in this way, it gives developer no incentive for building less parking. based on land use, even have so much driving. we have so much congestion on 19th avenue and around. nothing happens. we have issued an alternative that would have much less parking and impact. then you and the board of supervisors could see that the alternate project does not have these impacts. the way you analyze the project, there are so many units that will dry. you cannot do business that way. they were providing a big commercial center. it would draw people to drive there. we said it should be smaller. you have to provide enough commercial for the residents to walk and have shuttles.
7:06 pm
we made comments about allowing other people to use the shuttle. people who get off on the bus or the lrv can use the shuttle to visit relatives. they do not need all the parking. we tried to add more green space. we said you did not need all of the curb parking. you need more green space. this is very hard to do because of the way that you evaluate these projects. we have the same problems going on in other places. all of these crazy things happen. there is so much housing, therefore there is so much riding. they look to the table and say there is a much driving. no, that is changing. as san franciscans get wealthier, they have fewer cars. there are more families without cars. start the future right now. all of these projects that you
7:07 pm
are looking at welcome back to you sometime soon for t.i. with less parking and less impact, people will be walking around their communities with all the good improvements. we hope that we can get bthe developers t to put some nichckles in the pot for the m. adding more parking does not help. we said facetiously that if you want to have fewer people parking volume of 24/7 parking meters and then you have more money to help me out -- muni o ut. we hope to with a steady for less parking. thank you very much. -- we hope that you look at the
7:08 pm
steady for less parking. thank you very much. >> my wife and i have lived in parkmerced for almost 36 years. both of us are retirees. this is the second time i have appeared before your condition. being a former business executive at chevron, i look at this as a total project. i am not a gambler, but i am willing to bet each of you eight commissioners $100 that within the next few years if the investment group does not bail out and try to sell the project to another company, then you will pay me $1. [laughter] if you win, i pay you $100, each of you. to make it short, i strongly
7:09 pm
oppose this project. i do not think it is going to work. please spare the city of san francisco a big embarrassment. thank you. [applause] >> i am arnie larsen. i have lived in parkmerced for 14 years. when i first heard about the proposal, it made me very happy. it is the kind of thing i have been waiting for. moving to san francisco, i was looking forward to a neighborhood where there were a lot of things to do within walking distance. i found that there were none. now there are some. there is one edge of the property. -- they are at one edge of the property. part of the plan has places to go and things to do scattered throughout the neighborhood. it makes it a much more walkable neighborhood.
7:10 pm
that is one of the reasons the san francisco appeal to me in the first place and would make this neighborhood, parkmerced, a more attractive to live in. there's often a great temptation to drive down the peninsula to one of the suburbs for a lot of the things i would like to do. i would rather stay in my neighborhood. the neighborhood was designed around cars, from what i understand. it was designed to be a neighborhood for cars. we're trying to move away from that. these changes will help that. i see that as a very positive things in terms of the environment and quality of life. with that, there will still be a parking problem. that is a very serious concern. but understanding is they have planned for one parking space per unit. i am not convinced that is enough. in terms of the transportation plan, i support the tier 5 plan
7:11 pm
that has the m coming in in going back out through juniper. that would bring more traffic to help support businesses. i mean foot traffic, people, to support those businesses in the neighborhood. that is critical for them to exist, obviously. i have heard many people talking about the need for more housing in san francisco. i think that is true. i think this is a good place for it. looking around the city, this seems like the one best suited for that. i support that idea as well. housing alone, apart from the benefits that having more people would bring to the quality of life. rent-controll? i was at one of the meetings earlier down at city hall.
7:12 pm
supervisor maxwell, i do not know if i can say that she pledged the city to support making sure that there's rent control, but she made a statement to that effect, the way would be found -- that we would be found. it is not is the landlord working on it. the city is working on it. that gives me a lot of insurance. still, having something in writing saying that none of these people have to pay higher rent will -- thank you. [unintelligible] [laughter] >> i am steve hydy. 19th avenue corridor cannot possibly support all of the additional traffic. the study has indicated that it cannot. they need a 900 units and over
7:13 pm
16,000 veterans. that is way out of scale. listen to the people and not the developers. the people are here tonight telling you that they are appalled by the development. it is way out of scale. the buildings are way too high for an area that is so close to the fault line. the project is not an oasis in the desert. it has to respect the surrounding neighborhoods. the green aspects -- it is not green to have traffic gridlock and has a much traffic on this artery that is already choked. there are all these theories about the businesses and having them scattered around the complex. this may be good on paper. it may not be. i have gone to an area by the ballpark where they have the businesses scattered along with the apartments.
7:14 pm
they are not doing well. the borders bookstore recently went broke there. this is all good on paper. it is not necessarily going to work. the idea of routing the m line through the complex and shafting the area in the east where you do not serve them is not good at all. there has been a horrible success rate of businesses and parkmerced -- in parkmerced. it looks like it will work on paper but nothing is proven. in terms of public transportation, you can look at the 17 lines and see a lot more empty seats. what else have i got? anyway, that is basically it. it is just too damn much.
7:15 pm
listen to the people and not the money and the corporations. we need less people here. we need lower buildings. we need less traffic. we need more consideration for the surrounding areas. thank you. [applause] >> i am parkmerced and resident am for 15 years. i moved here when i was 30 years old and my son was 5. i raised my son here. we love parkmerced. i want to say it is not fair to the fore with a plan that does not absolutely guarantee rent control -- it is not there to go forward with a plan that does not absolutely guarantee rent- controlled by law and not just the promise of the landlord. in the 15 years, i have made big life decisions based on my circumstances. my rent-controlled apartment was
7:16 pm
a big one. i have passed up other opportunities in other areas. i love san francisco and want to stay here. part of my circumstances of always been my rent-controlled apartment. for me to suddenly lose my rent- controlled apartment at the age of 45 or older puts me in the impossible position of having to go back in time and make different decisions in my life since this is a 20 your project. it is not there to go forward with a plan that does not absolutely guarantee -- it is not fair to go forward with a plan that does not absolutely guarantee rent-controlled for the people in the 1500 plus garden apartments. [applause] >> the next group will be mike smith, william foust, dean preston, john scott, paula
7:17 pm
claudine, jeannie scott. >> i am lived in parkmerced for the last 11 years. i want to bring to your attention one point. if the plan is accepted, the city of san francisco will build less residential real estate and has now. it sounds strange to have more houses but less residential estate. let me explain. it is pretty much very simple. right now in the last five years, apartments have become more of the san francisco university campus. there is one simple example. in 3:0at 3:00 in the morning,
7:18 pm
there is terrible noise outside my home. i asked them to keep it down. they say if i do not like it, i should live somewhere else. that was the situation when people lived separately. 18-year-olds and 50-year olds need to live separately. 50-year olds do not want to party in the middle of the night. in the current situation, i can manage it. i get help from parkmerced security, but they cannot be at my apartment every minute. they are human beings. they listen to me. i can go to my membneighbor.
7:19 pm
let's manage it and let's agree. if you have a party, warned me. we will come to some arrangement. i can do it on my own. a friend of mine moved out of parkmerced. they are, you could not come to an agreement -- where they were, you could not come to an agreement because of all the people on the floors above and below you. you cannot manage it. it is not a good situation. unless the issue is resolved and the students live separately and apart from the rest of us who like to live quietly, the project is doomed. you will get much bigger dormitories for students. nothing else. i am not against progress. i understand that sometimes you have to pay for progress.
7:20 pm
if this commission makes the decision to approve the project in its current form, you have less residential estate in san francisco. you will have one big dormitory for sentences the university. if that is your goal, then you should do this. if not, you should take some measures. thank you. [applause] >> good evening, commissioners. my name is garfield powell. i have lived here since 1994. i have seen the property changed. it is interesting that they want to expand when they cannot accommodate the apartments they have. they cannot keep them filled. i find it unusual they want to build more. how will they fill those question if they have tried everything. now you can have pets.
7:21 pm
when i moved here, you could not have pets. they have students and section eight. they still cannot go the properties. yet they want to build high- rises. i have a problem with that. [applause] the way i read this project, it will increase crime. we already have problems in parkmerced. if you cannot believe it, try calling the police one night if there is a rowdy party. see if they come and how long it takes. if there's a problem, good luck. they do not respond. i was told by the police department that they could not come to turn down a party. the police at san francisco state would come and control my apartment. that did not make sense to me. the san francisco police told me they would not come to my house. i cannot believe that. one of your speakers that already spoke tonight fell in
7:22 pm
her to our apartment and laid on the floor for a long time because the paramedics could not get access to the elevator code to get up and save her. that does not make sense. that is what management is proposing, more high-rise towers that will impact our seniors. they will lie on the floor for hours while someone is petty enough to try to get them an elevator code to get it to save their lives. thank god she is ok. it could have been the other way around. this does not make sense. i urge you to not go forward with this. there are so many flaws in this proposal. management wants more money. the last thing i want to say is is about onm. you wait. if this proposal goes forward, you have multiple ones that come out. we are being asked as operating
7:23 pm
and maintenance based on the number of tenants. can you imagine the numbers they're proposing and what we would pay for in projects? i urge you to not go forward with this proposal. thank you. [applause] >> i am mike smith. there is a leaflet that has been going around asking if you want to have your house demolished. my answer is yes. i will pull the plunger if need be. i am not a long-term resident here. i do not have all the wonderful benefits of rent-controlled, although i do believe in it. i pay $24 a month. i pay $2,400 a month. it looks nice from the outside but of hot water will not come
7:24 pm
on for five minutes. the pipes will rattle. other things are going on. it is too much for a plumber or anyone else to be able to fix it the way it exists now. tear it down. build a new one. i might as well be sending a christmas card to the plumber as many times as he is at my place. i am not the only one. rent-control is a great thing. i love it. it is wonderful for a lot of the people who have been here 56 years. i pay higher rent. i expect a little more with that kind of rent. there are a lot of people in here that are newbies, so to speak. they probably feel the same way i do. i wish i had been here 30 years. i am paying big rent. i want the place fixed. if they cannot fix it, tear it down and build new one.
7:25 pm
i cannot conceive the idea of the city displacing thousands of people by reneging on rent- control. it does not make business or political sense. i think there are a lot of dramatics going on here tonight. whatever, you know. i do not have much more to say except that the first speaker of the night, john with the merchants association, i back him up with everything he said. thank you very much. [applause] > >> i am a resident of parkmerced. i am very much in favor of this new plan they have. i have a garden apartment.
7:26 pm
i see the plan as taking the residential area to the future. we leave the past behind us. i see that these apartments that they are talking about will be meeting the needs of the residence for the future for the next 50 years. i will not be here in 50 years. the people who live in these apartments will have apartments that are more energy efficient. they will be saving water. that is going to be a real issue for the next 50 years if not longer. there will be less of the open space with the greenlawn that sits there for the most part. it takes a lot of water. that will not be available more than likely in the next 50 years. it may be even sooner. i am very excited about these
7:27 pm
new apartments and the new residential area. i am looking forward to the organic farms. i am looking forward to the native plants. i am looking forward to the whole thing. i can hardly wait. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good evening. i do not support this plan. i think this is absolutely crazy. [applause] i think anybody who is supporting the plan has to be out of their mind, is not a resident, it is not thinking straight. i have lived in parkmerced. least 33 years. this is my community. these are my people. the people on this panel, do any of your live in parkmerced?
7:28 pm
probably not. are any of the landlords? -- are any of you wilandlords? none of you have any idea what we're going through, correct? that is why there is silence. having lived in parkmerced for 33 years, that means there is a lot of history. i am sure i am not the only person here tonight who has experienced the same kind of history i have been parkmerced. i see faces here that i grew up with. i lived here with my family for 33 years. we grew up here. i went to st. thomas moore with a number of people. in the 1980's, parkmerced was primarily families. we all grew up together. we all went to st. thomas
7:29 pm
moore. we all knew each other. we were all cohesive. this is a community. this is a family. from st. thomas moore, i went to san francisco state university. i have spent my life in this community and neighborhood. there is a reason. i might leave parkmerced and travel. i come right back because i left my heart in parkmerced and needed to be back. [applause] i have heard a lot of good points to tonight. i can reiterate a lot of those. i probably will right now. some of those are the fact that there is already a lot of crime in parkmerced. you pick up the phone and call security. what do you get? you get an answering machine. you get an answering machine. you definitely do not get