city is suburban korea that is nonsense. the management deserves better from the city as a partner in the department's economic development. this is limited in scope and defies possibly that the city could be an active partner for development because economic development is an important part of the allocation of resources necessary to deal with the mitigation effects. there are the boundaries of the project, impacting san francisco university, and thank you very

much. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is laura traveler, and i have lived in parkmerced for 26 years, and i am here representing the action coalition. it is my professional opinion that the planning commission needs to further review and study the eir. it appears that they rushed to approval of the eir, and in their haste for approval, three major areas were not addressed, area one, the environmental impact on parkmerced.

number two, the displacement of people, seniors, parents with young children, because the developers have forgotten that they are dealing with human beings of all races, creeds, and that room. it does not mean that the planning commission should do the same. decades of destruction impacting existing tenant can only lead to homelessness as well as terrible health issues among thousands of people. in closing, only the board of supervisors can address my three areas of mikey concerns. to review, we do, but and reconsider -- redo, and we

consider it the eir. thank you very much. president chiu: 80. next speaker. >> my name is jennifer clearing, and i am president of san francisco tomorrow. i am going to put this on the overhead. i want you to look where i just through the square or round up, and that is the four high rises that will be retained, and one of the things that our attorney did not have a chance to talk about is the additional displacements because of the high-rise. it is an interesting eir because it determines the olivine low-rise buildings are structurally inadequate and must be removed, and all of the high- rise buildings are structurally adequate and do not even have to be retrofitted, and eir even admits that in a severe earthquake, these buildings

would not even be habitable, and the total number of high-rise units i believe that are going to be retained and would still be under rent control is about 1500, so we are looking a potentially a double in displacement which is inadequately listed in the eir. i am highlighting these four buildings because they are on an area of fill, former wetlands leading into the lake, and that means they are more and vulnerable to damage in an earthquake, so we really, really believe that the current environmental impact report it is horribly inadequate in assessing the viability of the current structures, and we think that we really have to look at not destroying in neighborhood but looking at how we retain a neighborhood and make it better, retain the historic elements, allow an increase in density, without creating this terrible

displacement in cut and without the series fair isaac issues. thank you. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> hello. i do not live at parkmerced. but i have been there and no people there. we are dealing with people, who heard just like the next person, and when you start doing stuff like this, especially to the elderly, some of them are going to die, and i am very serious about this. i have seen this elsewhere. do you have time to listen to us? this is a tragedy. this is not something you can handle with a big vote. these are people. they heard just like anybody else. they are elderly. they are children from it they have made their life there, so when you start digging up their homes, make sure you find some grades, and i am very sure about

this because i have seen it happen. make sure you know what you are doing korea a lot of young people, this is new for you. understand that they've heard just like the next person. i do not care about structures or all of this other stuff. i care about the people who live there, and you should also. [cheers and applause] president chiu: thank you. before the next speaker, i have to say that it is a role in the chamber that we do not share applause or comments. if you did not appreciate -- i would appreciate it if you could follow that. thank you. >> my name is -- i have lived there for 50 years and a part of the coalition. we would like to request that when people speak a state whether or not they actually live there. even if rent-controlled housing is guaranteed, it is not, do you really believe that people are going to live there for 30 years

of construction with the proposed health hazards outlined in the environmental impact project cooking i have chemical sensitivities. chemical said the people may never be able to live in new buildings. what will happen to us? there will be increased emf. there are no guarantees, as there are no universal standards for this. new construction materials tend to be inferior to even the cheapest materials in 1940. in a letter which i have submitted 18 copies of, it states that presently the city of vancouver is on the hook for 474 unsold units, and lawsuits from 62 condominium owners for the shoddy quality of their houses. they left the city of vancouver holding responsibility. you want jobs.

there is ample jobs retrofitting the 1500 garden apartments. it is hard to say that the eir is there when the city will be paid $500,000. we have heard the developers say, "we will pay the city for every dollar the planning department has spent." i will lead to read the comments of catherine more. "the eir is incomplete. it fails to say why demolition is even necessary korea this will become a heavy traffic generator. the eir fails to identify impacts. future residents will remain car dependent. [bell] damn. president chiu: thank you.

>> a less parking alternative. more and more projects in san francisco are analyzing the parking alternative. you guys approved one last year, on market street, and the fact that it gave you some leverage, some leverage to deal with it. treasure island, 8000 new units with considerably less parking. it gives you ammunition. this only shows all of the impacts of the extra cars that they allowed to park there, and then people drive them. it does not show if they have less parking near what the alternatives might be. the impacts on the 28 orsillo, someone made a special study to show what would happen if we had a hotly on 19th avenue, asking people to pay to drive on 19th

avenue, all of this is better of one by having a full eir discussion with less parking. i like a lot of things in this project, but because it has too much parking, i would ask you to not certify it. not certify in this would send the message that every be considering -- everyone considered less parking. the phrase that the neighbors would all get of said, well, the neighbors are pretty far from this project. one side is the university, the other is across a busy drive. people and not want to park in front of someone's house because it will not have a car. it is true those that do get a garage, we are not or to go for zero parking, of course, they will drive a little bit more, but it will be less impact on u.d.. more people writing -- less impact on muni. more people riding.

[bell] president chiu: before the next speaker, if i could read these names? [reading names] next speaker. >> my wife and i have lived at one of the garden apartments for 36 years. we are retired. there is my letter dated march 25, 2011, to the board supporting this project. notwithstanding the reasons set forth in my march 25 letter, i want to draw your attention to wanted to give a documentarian a 16 page document draft memorandum to the mayor's office on economic and work force development. this is to conduct an

independent review. this document shows serious shortcomings listed below are the major findings along with my comments. number one, the eir is below the threshold required to attract the necessary private investment for a residential land developer program of this note. table one of the project with a range from 13.2% with a weak housing market recovery and strong housing costs. this would increase the costs among strong housing market recovery with growth increased to 5% in 2012 and 10% in 2013.

and then 17.8%, which is their best estimate, of market conditions. their review was completed in january 2011. president chiu: thank you very much. next speaker. >> yes, my name is steve. i have to say that this is an open and brutal assault of the working-class residents of san francisco. some of you have been taking money from your favorite developers, like sean elsbernd. i would say that those of you vote for this need to have your homes demolished in san francisco. [cheers and applause]

the fact of the matter is that this is not about protecting working-class housing in san francisco. it is driven by the voters who want to kick people out of their homes to make more profit. we need more working-class housing, not less in san francisco. i want to add also, where is this coming from? there has been a courage in the planning department. planners who were concerned have been driven out. why? because they did not represent the developers. they did not approve this project. we cannot tolerate the destruction of the housing for the working class people in san francisco. people are homeless and do not have a place to stay in san francisco. are you getting money from the developers? if you are, you need to disqualify yourself from voting on this project, the occasion of a personal financial interest in

this project. the supervisors to vote from this -- vote for this and then take money from the developers. you need to be removed from office. as i live said before, there is a lot of work in construction in san francisco rebuilding these units, for the purpose of protecting the people of san francisco and their housing. thank you. [applause] president chiu: thank you. if i could remind you that we do not have applause because it cuts into people's time. thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, board of supervisors. my name is ben. i am a resident who does not live there, but described it greatly concerns me because i

can see it impacts on the character of the entire west side as well as impacting the quality of life. let me take a minute and talk about a new resident who is 3 weeks old. how old will she be when this crowd is this? phinnaeus lee did--erin

brockevich. corn is this even being considered? quite these people would been foreclosed on. thank you very much. [bell]

>> wowe find this to be misleading. it leaked through. this was delivered. they seem to have memorized talking points, which would have you believe it is an aging blighted area, much too costly to maintain. none that we know of had

delivered a report that have clavier and practicality, of maintaining, . -- the soundness or lack there of of the housing. many of us would like to help. this is very attractive. we can also hear the cry. damn the torpedos. full speed ahead.

[bell] president chiu: thank you very much. next speaker, please. my name is jean. i am with the housing network. a avery well meaning man. it would be remiss of me not to complemeint them. apart from all of the legal issues, historians have detailed it that the soil is subject to the same liquifaction

as a marina, and we know what happened during the loma prieta earthquake. eevery town was a crzy mosiac. they have now been filled with silicon glue. that was just a 7.1 quake. [bell] parkmerced is very much within the pacific rim of fire. within walking diff --

distance. this is in your hands, mr. supervisors and lady muspervisors. [bell] president chiu: thank you very much. next speaker. > > i don't know how these work. president chiu: sfgtv will take care of it.

>> oh -- i consider myself a model tenant. there were the communal dump sites, as you see before you. i continue to live here because it is the only place i can leav -- live in a single-family home. my objections are population tripling, single family houseing being irradicated, a loss of private garden character and

living space, satellite parking lots would create an opportunity for more crime, particularly during nightfall. fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me. president chiu: next speaker,

please. >> i did not prepare any long speaches. i wonder if you have the answers. one question is ecological. i will have to live for 20 years with construction around me. do we know what the impact on the health of people?

i have a big concern about financial security. right now, we see [unintelligible] there are apartments that are not fully packed. there are empty apartments. and many people live in parkmerced because of their financial situation. but many people live there because it is a great compromise between having some kind of home and being not too far from downtown. but living in a high-rise 40 minutes away from downtown -- it is not that attractive. how will the owner be able to

fill out this play stacks -- this place? >> my name is tony. i am with the housing rights committee of san francisco. i do not live in parkmerced, but i have counseled many tenants who have come into the office from there with a variety of projects. i have been a tenant activist for the last 15 years. the housing rights committee is opposed to the parkmerced project. two reasons i will talk about. one is the environmental nightmare we are creating. a city that believes so strongly in green, in being green and being environmentally friendly, cannot allow this nightmare of toxicity and this amount of people to be exposed to this toxicity. it is total insanity.

the second thing is the loss of front control. i know parkmerced is saying the units will be preserved. there will be voluntarily put in rent control forever. i think that is problematic. i understand legally that could be easily challenged. that rent control could be struck down. i think that is a really problematic point here. there is no guarantee these units will stay under rent control if this plan goes through. finally, a market rate housing, more market rate housing in san francisco. do you understand that phrase? more market rate housing in san francisco. san francisco needs more market rate housing likely need sarah

palin as mayor. thank you. [applause] president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> my name is jeremy mellon. i do not live-in parkmerced. i did graduate from san francisco state university and spent plenty of time there. i am here to state that our organizational position on this matter is to support the appellants and to ask you not to approve this development project. we find this a housing for long- term residents, some elderly, many students, in an area in the city where there is always a constant need for more reasonably-rated housing. market rate is certainly anything but that. the environmental impact of the project