responsible development can be achieved. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. i speak today in support of this project. the population of san francisco is growing and the land mass is not. that is a reality. we have but one option left and that's to increase the density of housing in this great city. occupancy in the city right now is approximating what it was in the dot com era, but without a bubble to sustain us. we need additional housing. any vacant units distrust with multiple applications and increased market pricing. the competition is stiff. this project as a number of units to address the main

concerns in san francisco. there seem to be very many adequate, if not overreaching projectionprotection street as y manager, any property manager will abide by them. we need this housing. it is beautiful design. it addresses many needs of san francisco. it's done ain a sustainable way. i really insist that you keep your mind open. supervisor mar: thank you very much. >> good morning. i'm a business representative with the international union of elevator constructors, local eight. thank you for allowing me to speak. i've been a resident of west would park for the last 20

years. i've worked in the downtown area for probably the last 30 years. it's with great pride that i watched the renewal and revitalization of the south of market area and areas around downtown. it was a project on the west side of the city which has not experienced any such renewal. this project is -- has enough provisions in it to protect the tenants in light of supervisor chiu's proposed amendments. i would strongly urge, in light of that, that you allow this important project to move forward. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. >> i am peter andersson. i'm a business owner, architect, and faculty member of california college of the arts. i strongly support this project and believe it should now be brought forward to the board of supervisors for review and approval.

i sympathize with current rent whose individual households will be impacted in the short term. i would like to call attention to the larger values and the positive impact that this project will have for its immediate community and the greater community that is the city of san francisco. i believe the value of the city is that it allows for collective benefits distributed broadly to all the residents of the city. it's the job of the elected officials to look out for the larger good, which sometimes balances the interests of the individuals with the interest of the city. i'm from a area two blocks from the new trans bay construction project. speaking of quiet enjoyment, some days it is noisy and destructive, but i'm excited about what the new development will bring to the city as a whole. it would be more convenient for me, of course, for the neighborhood to not have that area in construction right now. it would not the right to hinder the benefits that will come to the city from the terminal project for the narrow and short-term interests of immediate neighbors.

in the same way parkmerced -- benefits of the development will bring positive things to all of the city. the development plans are progressive based on forward thinking concepts about sustainable approach to urban design and living. i encourage you to support this project. supervisor mar: thank you. we are joined by the former supervisor. >> good morning. we have a housing crisis in san francisco. a housing crisis that was created by your predecessors. your predecessors failed to recognize that housing in the city is the most affordable housing -- not the new housing. the demolition of the most affordable housing is something that even the housing element in

the past has recognized is a policy that should be opposed by the board as a policy for our city. however, that has been ignored by your predecessors in the redevelopment areas in the western addition, iand as a result of freeways, we have demolish housing. as a result, we demolish the most affordable part of our housing stock. the result of that, we had a housing crisis for the corporations fled and took hundreds of thousands of jobs to the suburbs. we now have the economy in a straitjacket. you do not now go to parkmerced and most 1500 units of housing. [applause] this is nothing more than the continuation of the failed policies of your predecessors. if you want to do your job correctly for the city and

county of san francisco, you preserve the existing housing and tell the developers to build new housing in vacant lots. supervisor mar: thank you. [applause] >> good afternoon. fifth generation san francisc an. got involved in this project 3 and a half years ago. about 600 families came together in an area near the project to try to form a group that would be sort of a liaison to the developers and all the concern interests. i think one of the primary things that allowed us to back the project from the beginning was that the developer was willing to preserve rent control. they had never had a problem with preserving rent control.

supervisor mar: just keep speaking, polease. >> we have to look at what will happen when we do not approve this project. i know what happened when san francisco state came through and wanted to do some improvements and some growth. they took their border regions in sacramento. that was a primary eir agency and we had nothing to do with that. we talked to our state senator, the mayor, a number of different people. we are kidding ourselves if we think that if we do not approve this project at this developer will stand around and try to find something else to do. we will watch $300 billion of funding go away. we will watch a lot of benefits we could derive and we will slowly be gobbled up by san francisco state, who has a mandate for housing, who has a mandate to increase student housing. guess what? it's not rent controls.

we're like to be the ones that suffer out there in san francisco. all of these rent-controlled units we're talking about preserving right now -- bye bye. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. >> good morning, board members. my name is kevin. carpenter, local 22. i've been here since 9:00 a.m. and i'm tired. i know you must be tired, too. if there are a lot of unhappy people here. i know it is a hard thing to do for growth. we all sacrifice. we're all in this together. if we are all in this together,

there are people that are hurting right now and there are jobs that are available out there for us. i'm thinking these supervisors -- you guys have a hard job to do. i understand you try to make everybody happy. times are hard right now. if we could accumulate some drops to get this economy going again, that would be a good thing for us all. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. >> my name is john thomas and i was lucky enough to be sent here in 1955 by the united states air force. once i got here, i did not want to leave and i'm very happy i'm still here. i'm also a resident of parkmerced. i have been there for 38 years. i would say without a doubt that the stellar management has really followed through on every project they made to us. the biggest improvement was the new elevators in all the high rises.

that caused a lot of problems at the beginning. these are the things that happened. i think the best thing you can do is go with a stellar management and hope that everything comes out great. 20 years is a long time. thank you very much. supervisor mar: thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. i represent carpenters' local 22. i would like to say that yes, parking is bad. you bet. traffic along 19th avenue is terrible. is there a need for housing? yes, there is. we can stand around and not do anything. if this were to happen -- a lot of people say this is a bad project 3 we could have another 100 meetings. where would that get us? if we did this on april 19, 1906, we would be meeting in temporary trailers and brisbane

right now. i guarantee you that. we got it done. we did it at city hall. we do it every day in san francisco. we get things done. this is a project that needs to get done. it will not just put people to work, which is my primary goal. this will provide people with direct control. this is something that we need. the whole west side of the city needs this project. we need this to go through. aror hands. we can continue it. that is not progress. we need to vote and get this passed through land use and we need to vote yes this afternoon. thank you, supervisor chiu,

for those amendments. let's hope this can go through. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. >> working with the parkmerced action coalition. i cannot go without saying that the heart of this project is the demolition of 1538 homes. it's the demolition of a neighborhood. pretty much every time we've done that in this city, we regret it later. i also need to point out -- mr. sullivan makes a good argument that the density bonus exception is something slightly less than that based on the language. it is not a bad argument. the problem is there's an argument to the contrary based on the legislative history, which is equally strong, if not stronger.

one final point to those of you here today. it seems pretty clear that this board of supervisors, one way or another, is going to approve this development. i would just say that you really need to clean up the process at this point. twice, the development agreement in recent history has been amended by a web master at 5:00 p.m. on friday afternoon and we find ourselves in the position of not being able to give you the kind of input you have come to rely upon. to this this morning, i tried to get a copy of one of the exhibits and i did succeed in finally getting it finally from mr. yarne. i do not think it says what they think it says. i was in the position of talking to your aid, supervisor chiu, on a cell phone during the meeting, trying to figure out what it said. i do not want to be disingenuous with you. we are not going to change our

opposition to this project, i do not believe, based on anything out there. if this project is going to have any integrity, you need to continue this for a week or two weeks to give us a chance to look at the language and see what it says. supervisor mar: thank you. >> thank you very much. supervisor mar: mr. flores. >> good morning. carter's local 22. supervisors, madame clerk, i will say it again. tenants rights. i want to thank mr. chiu. it's in the right direction. i urge you to move forward. let's plant the seed. you are all leaders. let's leave the way for the city and county of san francisco. we know how to do things right. let's do it. let's move things forward. thank you very much, supervisors. supervisor mar: thank you. maria, as well.

>> good afternoon. i did not come down here to make friends. i came to talk about what i believe in. i also came down here to call some people out. he comes out here representing the union. you did not see him walking members of our organization -- crying while there were up. supervisor mar: what is your name? >> ben. i'm a resident of your district, supervisor mar, for eight years. supervisor mar: please speak to the measures before you and try not to attack people. >> i would like to pass this around, if you have not seen this. this is still being distributed by parkmerced. it's says "and urban place with a suburban space." nowhere does this say they want to tear it down. in the state "a place to call home, a bright, a two-story town

home." condominium called the fixtures. it goes on, "you will discover sweeping views of the lake and city that only parkmerced can offer. you always have easy access to the great lifestyle and amenities that make parkmerced a great place to live. stop by. tree shaded patio and want lawnt outside your door." we could go on. which are you to believe? what are you going to believe? these are the same people telling you two different things. is it beautiful? is it like it? many of the problems we have to

urban stock and it's important to do what we can to upgrade the

city and provide good residential areas. i used to cover this body in a previous life when i was urban affairs person for the examiner. i used to write what the neighborhood was going to say before they did it. but anyway, i strongly think we need to move and move quickly. thank you. supervisor mar: supervisor chiu? >> so i've called all the cards. if there's anybody else at the last minute that would like to speak, please come forward. >> i am a parkmerced tenant since 1993. i opoem 100% the parkmerced project. the only acceptable alternative for me is the no-project

alternative option. both the merced project will cause irrersable damage to my health, to my family's health and to the health of the entire community but the enormous amount of toxic contaminants that will will released through the airplane by such a massive demolition and construction if this plan is approved. the c.d. is going to create a nightmare for years to come and environmental disaster that will last for three decades and will affect the physical and mental health of thousands of people by the level of decontamination tall be produced by the developer. not only on the site but in the surrounding area. please help us save our

community. vote know -- no to this project. thank you very much. >> thank you. supervisor? >> dean preston strongly opposed to this project and this mass demolition, this clear cutting of an entire neighborhood is unconscionable. i think you need to dig down deep and look at this not just on the technical issues that we have addressed and will address more, but on the fundamental choice, whether it is appropriate and a violation of city planning to give the go ahead on this. there's no way this happens on owned housing. it's only because we're talking about working class renters this is even on the table and it is absolutely outrageous. obviously spmps need to continue

to matter to sprrs these amendments. i don't know of any way you can give these the attention on the fly today. they have to be fully evaluated. two, the other problem is that the amendments don't address -- rent control enforceability is a problem. these don't address that. in other words, you can't require the developer to build new rent control housing, imposing a -- impose a $200 million control if they don't. look at the palmer case where the court threw out an inclusionary housing law. they also threw out not just the requirement for affordable housing to be built but also the in lieu fee that was built on that. the city attorney, think about the argument they're making. under their argument we can get rent control on all new crux in

san francisco as long as we allow or require the developers to putt one more unit than the zoning allows. that's not what the court is going to say. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. if there's no one else that would like to speak -- please come forward. last speaker. >> i am mark christian son, president of the merced suspension triangle neighborhood association. i wasn't going to speak but after listening i want to comment. first of all, what benefit will there be to the existing surrounding neighborhoods? especially the neighborhood i litsch in, directly across the street. 16-20 berps, new residents, added traffic and gridlock. the pier five improvements are something that should come before the project and any guarantees that they will be

fully implemented? that's the key. finally, metna will ask for air and sam: sampling during demolition and continue it throughout the project. who will pay? it should be paid jointly by stellar management frortress group and perhaps the san francisco health department to ensupera fair and impartial monitoring system. thank you. supervisor mar: tough. no more speakers after this person. >> very quickly. like the previous speaker, i really didn't intend to speak. after having heard the various arguments this morning and having done a cursory read-through of supervisor's chiu's revisions, i would just like to ask all of you as individuals of integrity that i know you are to maybe put this

on continuance, postponement. there's a complex web of interwoven issues that need a little bit more thoughtful time. thank you. >> thank you. so with no other public speakers, public comment is closed and the item is in the hands to have committee members. president chiu, did you want to wrap up? >> i want to again thank the members of the public for all of the deep thinking and all the work that folks have spent over the years and i also want to apologize that a number of us have had to come in and out. we also had a transportation meeting as which we had to cast votes. all that said i wanted to ask a couple of questions of the deputy city attorney on some of the questions raised by some of the opponents. mr. preston and i spent time

yesterday talking about the palmer decision and whether that should be a precedence in this decision. i want you to talk about that and why that is not a reason that suggests this agreement would be unforcible. >> yes, the palmer decision, as you know, deals with a different situation. it deals with the law of general applicability. >> can you explain what that is? >> it's a city ordinance akin to our b.m.r. program, affordable units, and requiring that developers, in the future, when they receive development rights from the si that -- city that they basically are required to adopt a certain amount of b.m.r. while we've looked at that decision and read it and considered it in light of all the advice we've given to you today and in this matter, there

are pieces of that decision that inform everything that we've told you about today. however, that is not a decision that deals with the development agreement or replacement rent control under the agreement. supervisor mar: in any conversations with the developer, i have repeatedly asked the city attorney's office as well as the developer to provide my colleagues and isom information about how courts might look at that. we have received a copy of a memo from a former california supreme court justice reviewing this development agreement. i know this is a document that can be public. i want to go through some of the announcements in this and understand from you what your thoughts are. essentially the announce is that the former supreme court justice

goes through and may aide has a copy of this. under costa hawkins, this parkmerced contract comes squarely within the provisions of what is permitted. costa hawkins does allow for exceptions when a city contributes, makes city contributions or other forms of assistance. and the document on page two and three list the various forms of assassins that the city is providing that according to supreme court justice reynosa would allow the city and developmenter to allow to agree on an agreement that would be exaptable to costa hawkins. >> i have just received this opinion for the first time and i quickly scanned it but it does reiterate what we have included

in the text of the development agreement, about reliance on the exception of costa hawkins for the forms of assassins given to the city under the state bonus statutes. so it appears to be giving an opinion based on their review of the development agreement and the specific things the city is giving to the developer in the development agreement that we sit with the express exception that's in costa hawkins for contracts with public entity that is provide assassins. supervisor chu: thank you. i certainly appreciate that change is not easy. change is actually scary. what i have been as concerned about with regards to this development agreement, though, is what happens if we don't move forward with protecting ten yanlts and moving forward with a project like this. i think we all know that in the

near future with -- if we don't succeed with the approach we will need to do very significant construction to the units in parkmerced that will be passed in significant ways to the tenants, or more likely, the owner of the project will very likely need to sell off parcels of this project in a piecemeal way that will likely also involve tenants and also novel significant disruption to the community in order to keep park merced moving forward. from my perspective we don't have a lot of great options but i think this agreement not only lays out a vision that is part of what i think the future of the city should be, but i think with all of the amendments that i have made creates, in addition to the protections that we've already seen in the agreement, a