i think we need to resolve it. i think there's going to be emergency hearings and that we need to notify the public and there's no way to anticipate sometimes. my suggestion is that we can -- the clerk and other people that's going to be sending out notifications continue to send out ahead of time as much as possible so most of the notifications can be done. but for those special instances

where we need to notify and there's only a friday left or whatever, then we use the -- rather than going back to the days where i -- you know, i would wait last minute to do everything. i suggest that we commit to it thoroughly and that in six months time i would like to know whether or not the pattern that has been used for the last six months continues or not. in other words, i don't want us to fall back and get lazy and say -- so i don't have to worry about it. is that a fair ask of our clerk? >> through the president, we certainly maintain that information and make a presentation to you after that six-month period. >> and then if that's the case if i could get commitments from others then i would be

supporting this amendment. >> thank you. supervis supervisor safari. >> thank you. i think what you're proposing is a good solution. what i've found working with the clerk and the board we have in the amount of time we have it would be good to have a back up option because we have confronted that. it has nothing to do with the preparation of the clerk's office or any of the other commissions that we work with. it has more to do with the timing and sometimes the lack of noticing on our part to the clerk's office so i appreciate the comments that you gave. it sounds like this will help facilitate the work you did as well as noticing the public as we move along with our process with the board in a timely manner. i think this is a good solution and i would be supporting the proposal. >> seeing no other names on the roster, on the amendment p proposed -- oh, mr. gibner.

>> just wanted to be -- trying to think through how exactly this would work. in some circumstances, for instance, the clerk mentioned the mta board is sometimes required to publish on five consecutive days. under supervisor -- i think that could go in two different directions, the mta board -- what the mta would public on monday and tuesday in the chronicle, wednesday and thursday in the examiner, friday in the chronicle or the board could give discretion to the clerk and ota on how those type of situations would be handled in order to maximize notice. >> i think that the ability to, again, use the examiner as the primary paper and publish to the max the maximum amount of time that we are able to do it in

advance in those particular days, why would that be any different i think than what we are doing right now? because i guess it happened -- like the examiner -- and i think the point was made that the change in the publication of the examiner happened midway through the contract and so maybe we could receive an explanation as to how we had handled it before this was brought to our attention today. >> madame president, angela clevio, clerk of the board. the good news is there has not been any 4 hour -- any 24 hour request for meetings so we haven't had to notice anything in the newspaper on a 24 hour notice. we always try to get with the chairs to determine when their regular meetings are scheduled and try to work with them in

advance when they are scheduling special meetings so that we can publish in the newspaper in advance. a member of the public only needs to see the notice one time for the continuous notices as mentioned by mr. gibner. so we would love to be able to publish all of our notices in every newspaper and would certainly look for the direction of the board on how you would want us to handle that. >> so it has not been impacted since the change? >> for the board of supervisors and our committees not so much but i have heard from other commissions who are concerned that their consecutive noticing will be impacted. >> has been impacted sgl. >> has been impacted and will continue to be impacted if

amendments are not made. >> okay. >> so could we write into this acceptance that we require -- basically what supervisor yee expressed but make it part of the acceptance for this? or write it into the resolution that we expect departments to plan ahead and to the extend possible prenotify about meetings as they have been doing because clearly they have had to do something in order to comply with the law since this change was enacted and then only in emergency situations or where it was impossible to think ahead do they advertise in the secondary

source. so basically what supervisor yee expressed but write it into the resolution as a requirement. >> something like if the department makes a written finding of necessity or something like that. >> there you go. >> okay. so that's a motion? >> yes. >> do we need to make a motion for that as well? okay. so you want to amend your motion and is there a second? seconded by supervisor yee. colleagues can we take that without objection? without objection the motion has been amended to include that. supervisor yee. >> just quickly in regards to the last example of the five consecutive days, if one were to look at the examiner all the time they will find an examiner. i'm real comfortable if the days

will be krchronicled rather tha trying to figure out a complicated system. that's my take on it. >> thank you. sup supervisor kim. >> so the amendment would be to permit our city departments to utilize the chronicle as long they provide a statement of necessity? that would justify why they were not able to submit it on a -- in advance basically. i guess my second question is what has sfmta will be doing during these last couple of months when the examiner reduced its publication? i know it's not been around for very long but i feel like i would have heard about this if this happened three months ago or two months ago. that's still enough time to inform members of this board that that's an issue. it's not like this started last week.

>> i am not at liberty to say what mta has been doing at the interim. the office of contract administration puts out the solicitation and then the departments issue and work from that. as we are not involved in the day-to-day as the use of the contract. >> i mean, my guess is that sfmta just sent a number of notifications at once, maybe more than five or ten days because they know the schedule of their meetings, right; is that correct? >> through the president to supervisor kim, that's correct. a five-day noticing period. we heard from the executive secretary to the mta who indicated a five-day notice would take a two-week period for the meetings. >> are the only exception special meetings that only have a 24-hour notice? if that's the exception i would

rather just say that unless it's a meeting that requires 24 hour notification. barring that we use our main contractor. i feel comfortable with that amendment. >> i think there are some noticing requirements for five consecutive days so i just think that it's not as if they are able to make a decision from my understanding to choose not to use the examiner that that would be the primary newspaper for the three days of the publication but if there's a five day notification then that would be those days specific to the chronicle if that's something that they need to use. >> so what the sfmta, my understanding, is doing to do is they are submitting it before the five day notice. i think that's a better practice for departments anyways. they are submitting their noticing because the meetings are regularly scheduled. some of them might be five days, ten, seven, eight but the notifications are going out.

out -- it just has to be previous of the five days. five day social security -- five days is the minimum. the 24 hour advanced notification, out would be great to have chronicle as a back up for those emergency meetings. i think that we should be very specific and allocated accordingly. >> thank you. >> i will support that as the amendment. >> supervisor. >> this is all business done by the city and county of san francisco. so we are focusing on meetings but we also have other publications and notices that need to happen. i can tell you not to shift the conversation away from the sfmta. i know the planning department has had some issues in the past where there's been some noticing that were missed based on deadlines, if it was internal or

if it had to do with missing the deadlines, the publication based on the examiner. i think that we need to approach this conversation based on how we can expand noticing. i understand the arguments that supervisor peskin made about including this as a city that's a paper as a half. i think that's an important thing as well. i certainly want to see us have more options but i think what we are trying to do and i think supervisor ronen put this forward, we are trying to have more flexibility for the departments that are there. i don't think necessarily that expanding notification into more than one publication is going to limit people's ability to have access to that notification. so i would be for the original proposal amendment. i wouldn't necessarily want to constrict this so much. i like -- excuse me, deputy attorney gibner said in response, if there's a necessitated need that gives some flexibility. if we are narrowing this down so much, it's three days right now,

if it were to go up or down we have the flexibility to adjust. i know this is not just about the sfmta and not just about meeting s that are happening in committee, it's all notification for the city as i understand it. >> thank you. supervisor tang. >> i just want to say that i appreciated the original movement because we are expanding it. speaking from experience as we are dealing with projects where a lot of parking is being removed, small businesses are being impacted i'm pressing the agency to hurry up and install passenger loading zones, white, green, yellow, you name it and what is holding them up are these notifications to go to these meetings. those are some real life examples right now. i'm sure there's more. a committee chair, especially land use or budget, we have these notifications and things come up. a lot of times we can't schedule things for you because of that

notification component. so, again, it really is a lot of things that do impact us on a regular basis. i would love for us to see that original y original amendment proposed. >> just for clarity supervise tang does that mean that the amendment to the motion you don't support that particular language? >> i would say yes, i would prefer the original one where it doesn't constrain it so much. >> okay. thank you. supervisor ronen? >> so just in listening to all my colleagues and trying to come up with something that perhaps we could all live with, i want to with draw my original motion and try to rearticulate the different motion. i with draw. can i get a second? thank you. so i would do is make a motion that would make the examiner the primary official newspaper advertising meetings within the

city and county of san francisco and that the city will only use the chronicle if there was some emergency meeting that required 24 hours notification or some other necessity. what was the language, attorney general? just kidding. i like attorney general. >> it depends on which attorney general. >> true. good point. >> good point. >> i know what the president was thinking. >> written finding of necessity. >> okay. with a written -- unless there's a written finding of necessity and that the departments report to the board on a quarterly basis about how many times they have invoked this need of necessity so that we can keep an eye on whether or not they are just using this as an excuse to get out of that advanced planning or if they're using it

responsibly for needs. >> okay. supervisor ronen has made a motion, supervisor kim seconded it. i just think that the amendment is too complicated and restrictive. i understand the intent but i do think that your original motion served the appropriate purpose. supervisor ronen. >> so it sounds complicated when i'm articulating it but i don't think it's that complicated. we are asking the departments to do what they have been doing, to think in advance, to publish in a newspaper that we would like to support for all of the reasons that supervisor peskin articulated, it's free and we want diversity of voice and a competitive newspaper atmosphere out there where we get great journalism through that competition and that we are

asking departments but we are saying we got -- we understand that there are going to be these situations, the 24 hour emergency meeting or something that we can't think of where we want to give you some wiggle room where we can follow the law. we just want to keep an eye on that so we make sure it's not being abused. it sounds complicated because i'm not articulating it well but i think the policy is pretty simple. we want to continue to use the examiner but have the chronicle there for flexibility and emergency when needed. >> emergency and for other specific reasons that need to be documented. >> well, for reasons of necessity. so if there's some reason that the department cannot plan in advance, which we expect them to do, but if they can't for some reason that they have this other way of advertising their meetings. we just want to keep an eye on it. >> okay. supervuzer -- supervisor ronen

made a motion to amend and it was seconded by supervisor kim. colleagues, can we take the amendment without objection? without objection the amendment passes. on the item as amended, can we take that same call? without objection, the resolution as amended is adopted unanimously. madame clerk, let's go to our committee as a whole, our first committee as a whole. items 50 through 52, please call those items. >> items 50 through 52, the special order at 3:00 p.m., the board of sup-- supervisors will amend as a whole. the subject matters of u -- of

items 51 and 52, amendment for the redevelopment project area and an ordnance approving and adopting an amendment for the project area to affirm the determination and make the proper findings for both ordnances. >> colleagues, we are sitting at a committee as a whole to discuss amendments to the hunters point shipyard and the bay view hunters point redevelopment plans. let's open this hearing. supervi supervisor cohn. >> thank you everyone for agreeing to hear these items. today's meetings is a long time in the making. the original hunters point redevelopment shipyard plan was approved 21 years ago in 1997. at that time the success of negotiating the stakeholders to secure a commitment from the

developer of providing 32% affordable housing was unprecedented. this development set the gold standard for what was possible in affordable housing negotiations and i applaud the forward thinking inclusionary housing numbers along with the advanced community benefits that came with them. the success is coupled with a promise of a boost to the local economy through hundreds of jobs sounded like a dream. it sounded like a dream to most hunter's point, bay view residents and others living in the southeast who looked forward to the addition of many amenities. so today i'm hopeful that my colleagues will join me in moving forward modest suggests to phase two of the hunters point shipyard redevelopment plan. these changes will allow shifts in four key areas. first land use changes, reduction in square footage from rnd and office to

hotel, retail and commercial. third, james town parcel and then fourth senior housing. i want to thank the members of the land use committee for hearing these items and thank the dozen or so community members who attended yesterday's land use hearing -- land use meeting. it was a very straightforward conversation. i appreciate the thoughtful questions raised by my colleagues. in particular, supervisor kim asked if there was a possibility to convert some of the commercial land use to office -- to housing in the future and most of the development at candle stick point is commercial and that designation does not fit our city's need anymore given that the shift -- given the shift in housing stability over the last 20 years. while that was not considered in the updates before you today, quite frankly we are not

proincluded proincluded from considering this in the future and we will make adjustments to the level of retail that's easy -- designated. thank you for raising this issue. second it was asked to consider a higher affordable housing that using state tax credits. i also think this is a good idea. i appreciate his thoughtfulness and i'm grateful for him taking the time to do a deep dive into the numbers. at this time i want to emphasize that we have housing opportunities in the 80 to 100% ami range and the below 60% ami range. so that is including the expedited senior housing development that i also mentioned earlier in my remarks. this is important because when we have conversations about

middle income residents not being considered or included in our affordable housing considerations it is critical that we understand middle income at the district or on the neighborhood level. sometimes it's not in congruent with a city-wide level. what is middle income in district 4 is not middle income in district 2 and that's not middle income in district 10. in fact, 55% city wide ami captures half of all residents in the bay view neighborhood. when we tell developers that we want to be sure their developments are for everyone, not just a tool to displace established communities these are the thoughtful conversations that must be made including the level of ami that doesn't reach half the neighborhood it aims to

help. what sense does that make? this is the mixture of housing that must be built, housing that accommodating a range of income levels for future tenants. period. lastly i must recognize that this work is happening in the shadows of on going fraudulent soil testing scandals at the hunter's point naval shipyard by a clean up contractor tetra tech. i'm proud to announce that as an out come of the may 14th government audit and oversight committee hearing that i called that the california department of public house has agreed to test parcel a for contamination and test all of parcel g as well. of course this will be paid for by a united states navy. of course. while the clean up is on going, the work that we are doing today

will allow the developer to get entitlements to do predevelopment work. we as a city will remain vigilant about the safety of the workers, about the residents at the shipyard, about the residents around the shipyard. we will not move forward with any development until we are certain that the soil is safe. now, what i'd like to do now is take a moment and say thank you to brittany, my aid, who has helped me with this entire matter. i'd like to also invite nadia who will be presenting. she's the executive director of ocii. she will be speaking now in greater detail about the planned amendments that we are going to be considered today. >> also we have members of the planning department here to answer any detailed questions that you may have. the floor is yours. thank you. >> thank you. and after your presentation we

will open it up then to public comment for members of the public. >> thank you supervisor cohn. good afternoon, board members. i'm nadia, the office of the director of community investment and infrastructure. i'm here to present on amendments to the hunter's point shipyard and redevelopment plans to allow for some changes being made to the candle stick point and the shipyard phase ii project. sf gov tv, please? our agenda today is as follows rg -- follows, i'll go on the rational and provide some background on the candle stick point and the shipyard phase ii project over all. then i will walk through the amendments themselves, describe the out reach that was done over the last year and finally summarize the actions before you. to orient you, here's a map of both the hunter's point shipyard

and candle stick point, an important distinction is that they are two redevelopment plans that over lapped the two different development agreements. the hunter's point shipyard development area shown in the light red colors indicates two phases of the shipyard, phase i is a smaller project and phase ii is all of the rest of the shipyard and it's part of the larger project with five point. the five point project also includes candle stick point which is on one of the bay view hunter's point redevelopment plan area shown in blue. so what i'll be talking about today is that the -- is the combined candle stick point and hunter's point shipyard phase ii, project with five point and most specifically changes that effect mostly the shipyard phase ii project of the project. the team from five point are here today and will be available

for questions.

d.p. . >> -- phase two project really kicked off with the approval of proposition g in 2018, which was followed by the board approval -- board's approval of the project through the redevelopment plan amendments in 2010. we all hit a bit of a lull during the redevelopment process, and then five points reprioritized the alice griffith public housing project in the candlestick side of the project. over the last year or so the developer started turning their attention back to the shipyard phase two side and examined their options under the redevelopment plan. as i mentioned, the project is currently underway on the candlestick side, but i wanted to briefly highlight some of the key principles of the project as a whole. one of the many advantages of this project is its incredible

robust housing program. over 10,000 units of housing will be developed with 32% of those below market rate units. this will be done through a combination of hope sf housing like alice griffith, 100% of affordable housing, and then a mix of market rate and conclusionary housing. all of this will be delivered. the project is also providing community benefits across multiple sectors and includes financial contributions for health and wellness, education, and other programs, realistic contributions, workforce and economic development programs. i should also note that as of today, phases one through three of the alice griffith program have been completed and are currently occupied. next, here's a visual to show you how the project was

contemplated back in 2010. on the left side is the stadium plan. you can see how the stadium took up the bulk of the southern portion of the site, and then, there 's a commercia framing it, with residential development, the yellow, mainly in the north. the nonstadium really just fills in where the stadium was with mainly low to middensity housing along with more commercial. now for what is proposed. you can see how the street grid has been changed which more closely matches the historic -- existing historic grid that's out there today. the southern part of the shipyard now has a greater mix of uses, integrating both residential and commercial uses. the legend may be hard to see but the purple denotes the residential uses, and the red

shows the locations of the artist complex. that new vision required some adjustments to the redevelopment plan. first, the names of the district -- first, the names of the different districts in the phase two are being opted to matched designed urban design vision. the developer wanted to create a more diverse mix of commercial uses, so you will see in the next slide how adjustments were made within the existing totals to create that mix, namely by lowering the office component and reallocating up to other uses like hotel, retail, institutional uses, and such -- such as schools. the amendments also allow for more flexibility within candlestick point and the shipyard phase two project as a whole. as i'm sure you're aware, the timing of the transfer of land from the navy has not been definitively determined, but we have land certainty for the

candlestick point, so the amendments would let a modest amount of office space shift to the candlestick point side if so desired. since market conditions may shift during the very long build out of this project, there's also some added convertibility. finally, there's one cleanup on the candlestick side. the 49ers actually own the land right on the edge of the project on jamestown avenue, but it was never fully entitled through the nonstadium alternative. so in order to allow them to move forward, we're going to pull back the zone one boundary of the bayview-hunters point redevelopment plan area to allow for the 49ers parcel to move forward on that like any other project under the

planning code. here, you can see the shipyard phase two site would be distinguished by four districts, connected by key features such as pedestrian connections and both large and small scale parks and open space. and a quick map of the candlestick point side just to show where the jamestown parcel is. again, it wasn't fully entitled through the project and just needs to be moved to the rest of the bayview-hunters point redevelopment plan in order for it to be use -- to use standard planning code entitlement. for the land use entitlement plan adjustments, there are two main types of adjustments. first, there's the reduction of r & d office space from 5.1 million down to 4.4 million square feet. next, the reduction of 35,000 square feet has been

reallocated among the other uses, such as retail, neighborhood and institutional and retail. there's no change to a number of existing uses in the plan such as the performance venues, artist complex and community use entitlements. together, the redevelopment plan allow for a total of 12,100 housing units. that remains unchanged. this is a different way to look at the same information but in a more detailed view that also includes the shipyard phase one project. again, there's no net change of the overall redevelopment plan levels. rather it is a reconfiguration with existing plan. that theme of reconfiguration continues throughout the project as the different program elements such as the parks and open space plan and then updated is to match the new street grid and land uses while providing the same level or more in amenities recreation

and mix of activities. similarly for the transportation plan, the phasing has been updated to match the new streed grid along with improved pedestrian and bicycle routes, the potential for water taxi, and an increased commitment to monitoring traffic and transit. here's another view to show the updated bike and pedestrians plan, providing that needed connection into and within the shipyard site. the amendments to the redevelopment plan also allow for the potential for what we're calling the eco district by defining some future infrastructure categories that could lead to a green energy program like recycled water treatment facility, geothermal heating and cooling. outreach to the community as well as to number of city departments and advisory groups began last summer and has been

ongoing. o.c.i.i. and the developer has worked closely with the hunters point shipyard citizens advisory community and has engaged the community through open houses, sought feedback from recreation and park, planning, m.t.a., and other city bodies. we've culminated the months of outreach and workshops with a series of approvals, including the c.a.c., the ocii commission, the planning commission, the m.t.a. board, the over sight board and the state lands commission. and state lands commission just approved the changes in height last week, and we expect to go for the second approval in august 2018. we also intent to go to the bay area conservation and development commission to secure a master permit for the project, as well, within two years. and so that leads us here before you. the action before you approving

the ordinances to adopt the amendments of the hunters point shipyard and the bayview-hunters point redevelopment plans. my staff and i are here to answer any questions. the five point team are also here today as well, as well as representatives from m.t.a. and planning. i would also like to acknowledge that the chair of the hunters point shipyard citizen's advisory committee who has worked very closely with us on this project is here as well. i want to also thank supervisor cohen for her leadership on this project. with that, we're all available to respond to any questions you may have. >> supervisor safai: thank you, director. supervisor cohen, do you have any additional comments before we open it up to the rest of the colleagues. >> supervisor cohen: thank you for the offer. no, i don't. we can dig in. >> supervisor safai: any colleague -- oh, supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: yes. just a question for the -- on

page 6 of your slides, the housing where it talks about 32% -- well, of the 10,500 housing units, how many of them will be just renovating the existing versus how many will be brand-new. >> so the alice griffith, that is the housing component, i believe there's 256 units that would be 1:1 replacement and affordable housing units. so it will be demolition of the existing bodies and new construction. >> supervisor yee: and then of those 2 -- of the 256, does that come as part of the 32%? >> it does, which results in

3,345 affordable housing homes. >> supervisor yee: okay. and then -- and currently the ones that you would be tearing down are not occupied? >> so the way the alice griffith public housing project is staged, we were able to start new construction and have built the first three phases, generating over 300 units, and so there is no demolition. so that's allowed folks in the old units to move into the new side. at some point, the developer will come back and demolish those sites. >> supervisor yee: okay. thank you. >> supervisor safai: colleagues, any other additional questions right now? seeing none, we'll go ahead and open it up to public comment. any members of the public wish to comment on this item, please come forward. please state your name for the record if possible.

>> this project is nothing more but an example of racial disparity. it's a good project on the face, but when you read the fine print, well over several people have died from radiation contamination. you deliberately fail to incorporate by demonstration where one black came and went to jane kim's office and said he had two surgeries in his stomach because of radiation contamination because he's living on property that's contamination. you deliberately fail to incorporate how the black skin color female called your office two times on how perpersonal friends have died at the treasure island project which has the same type of radiation contamination. you deliberately fail how two females stop me in the main area of city hall and want me to help them and show them where cohen's office is in order to report how one of their mothers died of radiation

contamination and both of them got radio active problems in their lungs from breathing that hazardous materials that the health department claimed that they used a tarp to cover up the radio active material. we don't want you to cover up that radio active material, we want you to clean it up. you deliberately failed to incorporate the fact that investigative reports followed and washed tons of that saturated contaminated radio active material being shipped to pittsburgh to an area that's predominately white, and now people are complaining about that in their area. it won't take no 21 years for an area of white people to cake care of the problem like it did to take care of a problem with the black problem. when two whites get put in

jail, then you want to have a hearing. >> supervisor safai: thank you, next speaker. i just want to remind speakers to direct their comment to the board, not to individual members. [inaudible] [ gavel ]. >> supervisor safai: order. thank you. next speaker. >> hi. my name is dwayne james. i'm a native of san francisco. i'm a graduate of balboa high. i'm a big breed fan. i just want to tell her, i worked hard on that campaign. i've been here since '64. the first mayor i remember was alioto. the best mayor san francisco ever had was dianne feinstein. the worst was jordan. watch who's around you, london. be careful. i made a song for you. the roof, the roof, the roof is on fire. we don't need no water, let the

breed put it out. the breed. go london, go london, go london. i don't like some of the stuff you do, but i still got your back. no i am gyms. go london. >> supervisor safai: thanks. i just want to remind folks in the audience to please comment on this item. this is not general public comment. we will take that later in the meeting. thank you. >> yeah, hi, supervisors. linda richardson, long time bayview-hunters point resident. i cofounded the southeast alliance for justice and the bayview environmental health task force working with the department of public health. been here 30 years and also helped with the coordination of the land use planning for the entire bayview. i'm here today to support the amendment, the phase one, all of you saw it, the phase one of

the shipyard which led to the cohen development, and i need to tell you, as supervisor cohen told you earlier, this development is the economic engine of bayview-hunters point. it was all the decisions that they were mandated to carry out. phase two, the concept plan, like any great development that's going to span about 20 years or so lays out the housing elements, the type of quality and the variations of those. it's talking about the land use provisions, open space, transportation. it's in there. the special space, the combination, who's going to get what. we have senior housing, as you know. this plan has more senior housing. this is the only part of san francisco that is building affordable housing. we need to look at that. it is the only project on the mission bay, so what you have here today is basically a great plan, and we just ask for your blessing. it has gone through all the

regulatory agencies, and we believe that when you look at the detail, you will pass it. thank you again for your time. >> supervisor safai: thank you, commissioner. next speaker. >> hello. my name is michael boyd, and i'm the president of californians for renewable energy, inc. and my group recently won a federal lawsuit against the united states environmental protection agency over what's called an unreasonable delay in responding to a civil rights complaint. i want to give some specific comments on the redevelopment amendment. specifically, i am feeling concerned about the risk to the current residents of parcel a and the surrounding community,

and i'm feeling that there's more environmental work that needs to be done by the city. i feel like the prior environmental impact report you guys did isn't adequate in light of the recent findings regarding tetratech. i think it would behoove you to do another environmental review on this amendment, and in this review, i would encourage you to do a risk assessment and to do a protocol for lessons learned so that this type of occurrence will not happen again that puts the community on -- at risk. and then, i also would encourage the community to improve its outreach to the community. it just seems kind of improve

that a group like peer has to be the one to bring it to the public's attention instead of the city doing it itself since obviously you knew about this back in january . i really think it would -- i would encourage you to work with the affected community to identify and -- >> supervisor safai: thank you, sir. thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> hello, malia. it's okay. how you doing. i would like to say i'm glad to finally -- that finally glad maybe this plan will be passed today, and i would like to say the maker's spaces from the potential to be very successful, especially with the presence of other businesses and all the traffic the hotel will bring. this is great for the community and the new emerging businesses. as a resident, i wholeheartedly support this plan. thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is lottie titus, i'm a long time resident of bayview. this has been a long time planning, and it's taken a long time to get this amendment approved for bayview-hunters point shipyard redevelopment plan. please remember that 32% of affordable housing will include below market rate housing for seniors. i am on the verge of being a senior. i've turned 60. i am looking forward to more housing for people of my age and those who are older. it is very important that our seniors who paved the way for us have decent, habitable, safe, beautiful space to live in. their housing, it's going to include beautiful amenities for

them. so phase two of this project should move forward without delay, supervisors. i urge you to approve it. thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker. >> hello, board of supervisors, malia, and i'd like to, in the absence of the president and mayor elect breed, congratulations, a job well done. you represented everyone in this wonderful city which i was born in at the pride parade, and i'm proud. now, i am here to support line 52, the redevelopment of plan amendments of bayview-hunters point, and i support the retesting. i am in biotechnology. i did some testing myself, and it's truly contaminated. i did it with u.s.f., so i

do -- i am on a little break now, so i just ran over here to support the hard work that rodney and others have been doing and -- with malia and others. so i'd like you to go ahead -- and i support the approval of this plan. thank you so very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. charles lawrence. i just basically want to say open spaces and parks are in short supply in bayview-hunters point. the level of density we've grown to demands more open space and our children need it. all of the amendments are tangible improvements serve the highest good of the residents and project. i encourage you to support the amendments without delay. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors.

my name is joyce armstrong, and i'm the very proud president of the san francisco housing authority's public housing tenant association. i represent nine family sites across the city, five of which are in district ten, which is almost 2,000 units of housing and families. i voted "yes" on prop g in 2008 and also prop o in 2016. as most of the majority of san francisco residents that don't even live in the bayview supported. everything i've heard is an improvement, and we really need this senior housing. like, i'm already a senior. i'm 70. if it weren't for affordable and low-income housing, i

wouldn't be able to stay in this city. everything i've heard is an improvement on the existing plan while bringing the d.d.a. in alignment with the redevelopment plan. i encourage the supervisors to join me in passing the items that are on the roll today, and thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is eloise patton. i am a resident of district ten and a member of the legacy committee for the hunters point shipyard. i want to encourage you to pass this project. it has been a very long time, as you have heard before. at the meeting yesterday i indicated i was 28-29 years old when this started. i'm 60 now. i think it's time to continue

to move. now one thing i want to get clear, all of us want residents in district ten to be safe. all of us want the soil to be clear, but also, as we move forward, nothing can be done unless we approve these amendments so that when we move past this piece, we can start on day one moving and developing. this is a legacy project for those of us that have been residents in bayview, those of us that actually endured the years of environmental racism, this is a day that we've waited for. i'd like to thank supervisor malia cohen for her leadership and for her caring for the residents and the health of the residents. however as we move forward, we must get the paperwork done now so that when it's ready to go, we can start moving forward. so i strongly encourage you to vote yes and approve those

amendments. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> i have a couple of years on miss patton, and i've been following this project for about half as long as she has, but that's still an awfully long time, 13.5 years that i've been following this project. we share everyone's disappointment in the navy and its contractors in not achieving the adequate cleanup of this site. we share that disappointment not just on behalf of the neighborhood and of the site's eventual occupants but of our own members who are already working out there and who we hope to have working out there in greater numbers in the not-too-distant future. when that cleanup is done, and we have faith it will be done, we do need a plan in place for the site. the plan before you establishes a grid that will allow -- street grid that will allow for the adaptive reuse of existing buildings. it's a very hand some project

as currently designed, and it will allow for greater economic possibilities in the site, both for our members and for long-term employment, and we ask you to approve these amendments. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. >> tim paulson. i'm also with the san francisco building and construction trades council. it has now been ten years since this illustrious body moved this project forward the first time, and it was early in my tenure at the san francisco labor council as the executive director where we at that time negotiated an agreement that included for the first time -- it was actually, when you put it all together, it was 35% affordable housing, which was the first time that happened, and we're very proud of the work that this body and so many of the labor unions and our partners did. and so here we are, ten years

later, and there's things that have changed. any way, we're here to support the amendments because there are certain things that have changed. the 49ers left town, and there's other thing that's had to -- that had to be tweaked. we're here to support this. i also want to say things that mike terrio said, we are absolutely upset at the cleanup process, but we do need to have a project to move forward when all this stuff is done, and so therefore, we support this project. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> madam chair, michael duffy. i'm struck by the inclusion of geothermal in the eco district area. is this a case of wildly optimistic, or given how the case has been going should it

be filed under the standard beware of what you wish for? [please stand by]

in addition caps on the board considers advising plumbing of including a simple thing like parking with these new developments are currently in district ten park parking is a real bad problem. we have to double parked. there are people parking and triple parking people are being ticketed par but there is simplo where to park to get people to their residence. not all people can ride a scooter or a bicycle pack and whatnot. public transportation is horrible in that district. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. are there any other members of the public and would like to address the board during this committee of the public hearing on the amendments to the hunter's point redevelopment plan