(roll call). >> item 2, approval of minutes for february 26, 2019 meeting. all that favour? aye. >> approval -- pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> please be advised that cell phones and electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. please be advised the chair may

order the removal of the meeting room of any person responsible of with the cell phone or pager or other similar device. please be advise add member of the public has three minutes to make three minutes on each agenda item. item 5, public comments on items listed on the agenda. >> any public comment on items not listed on the agenda? i see none. >> come to the microphone, please. >> this is regarding and item that's on the agenda? >> no. >> my name a nancy d irixon.

i'm a 14 year resident of 111 chestnut street, telegraph conanyonum association and i would like to talk about the proposed smmta changesfmtm chan. go to the microphone. i would like to talk the changes to the intersection at chest nut street, samsun street. my main reason for being here is to address the negative affects

of the proposed changes on traffic and on the residents of this area. the sfmta is proposing bike lanes on battery streets. on samsome street which is northbound it plans to shrink the two lanes to one lane of travel. the other lane will be a dedicated left-turn lane on to chestnut. this will force one half of the heavy northbound samson traffic and cause back-up on the convested one block of francis francisco. our neighborhood heavily occupied by elderly residents cannot handle this increased pinch with all of business activity nearby at intel levi's

1725 montgomery street where golden gate obgyn, 55 i 55. there's a child daycare centre at 1600 montgomery street along with daler daily ups and moving. it will become clogged with golden gate transit bus and financial district afternoon traffic. having to shrink down to one lane on that one block before chestnut. it will be a traffic nightmare. we residents are sinking to the bottom of the, quote, livable street's lift. i ask the port commission to please oppose the plan southbound, right turn ban on to chestnut. the sfmpa can work out another way for cyclists to keep the

original intersection. >> any other public items on items not listed on the agenda? come on up. >> good afternoon. i moved to san francisco in 1995 and i've always lived on the hill, even when there was nothing there. and like everyone else in this room, i work very hard and made a lot of sacrifices and took a chance on that neighborhood, that it would become a nice place to live and it did. however -- i'm sorry. we took a chance and we would

all like to see how our neighborhood figures out but the fact of the matter is, everyone here not made the investment but made a commitment to stay and that is what makes this area what it is. anyone can invest but if people didn'tly here, there wouldn't be a neighborhood. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on items not listed on the agenda? i see none. pub comment ipublic comment is . is this an item not listed on the agenda? >> it's not listed. >> if there's any other public comment on items not listed, please come up. >> i wasn't prepared for this.

i live on delancey street and we have a brick street called federal street. are you familiar with that? >> federal street between. >> off of delancey, it's a t intersection. i have been trying goin trying h in the city to get those bricks maintained and it's a historical neighborhood and no information whether to find out if that's a historical street or not and each time i talk to them, sometimes i get threatened, if i keep complaining about the brick situation, they will pave over it. >> is this port property? >> i believe so. it has a marker that indicates where the title offed tides wore back in the 1800s. it should be an historical street.

iand nobody can tell me whether it is or not and needs to be maintained. it's one of -- i don't know how many streets we have in san francisco similar to this. i know of about four. any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> director's report. >> good afternoon chairman, members of the commission, of the port staff. i'm the executive port director and i want to make sure we have exiting today. it's wonderful to see so many members of the community but i want to make sure people get in and out and can folks raise their hand if there's a seat? people can take that one seat if and folks can move in, we're piping the sound outside but we need an exiting route in the

back of the room, please. furthelet mezero lot 30 been tha community meeting at delancey street at the street foundation and community room 600. and our commission secretary is going to recommend our president that we limit public comment to two minutes on 7a, so we can get through all of the members of the public that have come here if time to attend the delancey street meeting. we are hosting our third annual contract's open house this march 21st at pier 1 at 8:00 a.m. these have been excellent network bing opportunities to wk with upcoming contracting opportunities, our cmd office,

the purchaser and we'll have a time for networking and refreshments and we encourage local small businesses and contractors who work for the port to attend our networking session and that concluding my report. thank you very much. >> is there any public comment on executive director's report? seeing none, public comment is close. >> item 6b, nothing to report. >> nothing to report. >> nothing to report. >> commissioner, would you like to entertain a motion to limit the public motion to two minutes? >> can i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favour. the motion has been approved. >> informational under the department of homeowners to build a new temporary shelter access for everyone, navigation centre on lot 330.

good afternoon. i'm going to provide a bit of an overview on item 7a. this is an informational item for a temporary safe navigation centre on seawall lot 330. seawall lot 330 is currently used as a parking lot. the city's proposal is to use half of the site for a safe navigation with a four-year lease term at a fair market rate rent to be determined. the safe navigation centre would seek to address ongoing homelessness and shelter challenges along the waterfront. save navigation centres built on the successful navigation centre model making it more cost effective and scalable. we have received numerous

letters an e-mails from neighboured and stakeholders and residents throughout the city and i wanted to thank amy for all of her help to track those email and letters and also to respond and i wanted to make sure that i knew everyone were taking them in and we do appreciate the public's comments on ongoing feedback and as director forbes mentioned, there's another opportunity after this meeting opportunity to continue to share feedback and offer input at delancey street and other opportunities to provide feedback, as well. the city will be hosting another committee meeting on april 3. in addition, they will be joining the fisherman's wharf next week, as well a joint meeting as the central waterfront advisory groups not week. the city will be joining the south beach mission bay neighborhood association meeting on april 8th, so there will be other opportunities for the public to provide input and

feedback. at this point, i would like to note that once again, this is informational item and we'll be back before this board april 23rd for action. in the meantime, i would like to introduce the director of the department of homelessness and supportive housing go over the city's proposal for a safe navigation centre on seawall life lot 330. >> good afternoon, commissioners and thank you very much for having me here today and thank you, director forebes. we appreciate your partnership over the years and we'll spend a little bit of time talking about the proposed navigation centre at seawall lot 330. before we begin, we all know we have a serious challenge addressing homelessness here in san francisco and our last point in time count, january of 2017, fro,7500 people were experiencig

homelessness on any given night and we estimate 30% are living on the streets. that's only one given night. we estimate there's 20,000 people a year experiencing homelessness in san francisco. they have faced challenges of unsheltered challenge people on streets during the day and the waterfront doesn't have a nearby shelter to serve that. in october of 2018, the mayor announced to open up 1,000 more shelter beds in the city and since she took office, 212 beds have been opened under this initiative and we have approximately -- we're hoping to open 1800 more by 2020 and adding 300 ne 300 units openinge

next six month and there's 1,000 more units in the mayor's housing. so we're working hard to expand our footprint in order to serve the many people still on our streets and in need. so safe navigation centres, safe stands for shelter access for everyone and they build off of the best aspects of navigation centres but make them more scalable and more sustainable and we learned a good deal with the navigation centres we've opened up over the years and we want to improve upon those and also make them more efficient, lower the costs and better serve the people who are staying at those sites. essentially, safe navigation centres are temporary residential facilities. they offer on site support services for people who are staying there and there's to walk-ins or no lines. it's not first-serve, first serve basis. people make reservations for the

beds or are brought in by a city staff person and there are clients serving amenities on site to bring pets, et cetera. the idea is to make them more attractive to people experiencing homelessness and san francisco has been moving away from. we are still in the process of gathering input from the community on the design, so please take this as just a very rough proposal. we're talking about 175 to 225 bed facility on port-earned property opening sometime in the summer of 2019. it says up here to operate for four years, but i think the idea is that it's temporary and i think we're still in the process and interested in a dialogue with all of you about the length of time and wants to be clear we'll be prioritizing unsheltered people sleeping in waterfront neighborhoods will be the ones that get to use this facility. this is a very rough design but

really just sort of a massive study, if you will and a work in progress and not wanting to get input from the community and from you on the design. and i think the important thing, and i know many of you know this, we appreciate your partnership and the partnership with the community at the central waterfront navigation centre at the dog patch neighborhood. we developed a good neighbor policy we signed by the community and that was included in the contract with the providers who are operating the navigation centres. some of the things those includes regular meeting and working with the neighborhoods to address concerns, participating in any appropriate community meetings that are in the neighborhood that we could be a part of, as well as the provider, having on site staff available to address any concerns that a neighbor may have about something happening in or around the sites and then also mai minimizing impact in te

neighborhood and there will be security on site 24/7. some of the other things in the good neighbor agreement is actively discouraging loitering in the immediate area, informing the area of all of the services available, maintaining communications with neighbors, maintaining safety and cleanliness with security but also with cleaning crew and organization that we generally utilize at the sites that hires people who are homeless into entry level jobs keeping the neighborhood safe and clean and ensuring the sidewalks and the driveways and all adjacent areas are not blocked and prioritizing clients sleeping in the area. so this is an example of the types of things that we would into a good neighbor agreement. i know that you all are aware, commissioners of the success we've had at the waterfront navigation centre and also wanted to just provide you with

this example of a success story in the mission district. when be opened up two navigation centres in the mission district, we began something called md hop where the outreach project, our department, the police and public works and during that time, we engaged with 700 individuals who were in the mission district, primary people who were in tents. there were over 300 people when we started and went we finished this project, they're below 40 on any given night. we've maintained that and we close the initial navigation centre we opened up in the mission but opened up at the other end to help maintain the success in the mission district and as a resident of that part of the city, i definitely see the improvement that were under

chavez and the people staying there, 70% accepted placements into navigation centres and i think this is a good example opening up something like this can help to improve the neighborhood. i think it's also, and i'll close with this, important to remember people experiencing homelessness are no different from any of us. none of them grew up wanting to be homeless. they're somebody's sons and daughters and on the streets and need our help and the only way to provide people with assistance is to get them into a place of safety. people who are suffering from mental health or substance abuse orders will not get better living on the streets and have safety for them is part of our response system. these are two of the system that thanks to your support were able to be helped at the centre waterfront centre. the first client was homeless over two years, found a job and housing on her own.

the second client was homeless 15 years and since moved into one of our permanent supportive housing sites. we see these kind of successes everyday at the navigation centres and shelters and i wanted to point these out and thank you for your support and the navigation centre and i'm sure if these two clients were here, they would thank you as well. so thank you for your time. i'll stay and take questions. >> thank you. we will open it up to public comment now but thank you, jeff. >> thank you. >> first, and we have limited the comments to two minutes, so we can get everybody -- hear everyone's comments. janet lawson. and then is this heidi brannen and robert arntz after heidi.

>> hello. i live in the neighborhood. i live at 200 brannon street and i understand the need for facilities like this, but i'm concerned that it's so much larger than any of the previous navigation centres. i feel like the city doesn't have any experience with a group this large and wit what the impt would be on the community when you have that many people who are going to be wandering the neighborhood during the day. yes, they live there and sleep from but it's going to be their neighborhood, too. and so i would like to hear from the city how, if they've considered the impact of a facility that is doubled the size of the previous one. >> robert arnz and rebecca winroth.

>> thank you very much. i've been an taken in san francisco for 40 years and i represent families. i'm also a resident of the brannon, 229, so the navigation centre at the seawall will affect me. i would like to point out delancey is around there and it's fantastic. it's an organization that has helped so many addicted people. it's wonderful and fully organized. my building in san francisco on 515 fulsome, the city wanted to build a transitional centre there and i could have held that up and i didn't because it was a permanent building that would greatly help people. but there are a lot of ramifications from that which i totally support and that is a lot of drug addicted people came around that were dangerous to my employees. but we took care of that. and i'm still happy that i

supported that. i am currently prosecuting two wrongful death cases where homeless people killed family members. and i want you to know that i'm not heartless. i told you, i support delancey street 100% and this will be a disaster. i hope, and i ask you this question, will you take legal responsibility for the ramifications that will occur from this? you know, i represent people hao have been injured and killed because the homeless go into bart, as we know and none of us want to be heartless. none of us want to say, you know, we're not homeless, you are and we don't want to support you and when you talk about the homeless in this neighborhood, if i were homeless, let me tell you, i would want to be in this

neighborhood. because that's where i'm going to be able to panhandle and get the most money. that is where my grandchildren when they're here in the city see people defecate in front of them. my wife and my daughter, my granddaughters feel unsafe in the city. this will be a magnet. let me tell you my experience when i have more time. >> ok, when you have more time. [ laughter ] >> thank you very much. (applause). >> is rebecca here?

will someone start, please? >> hi. i have been a proud resident of district 6 for almost 20 years and i've seen a lot of changes. and i've stuck through them. in particular, the development of the waterfront into a scenic and thriving location in the city for residents all across the socioeconomic spectrum to enjoy. i see families and children walking the promenade all the time with strollers and dogs and enjoying the park, joggers, people from all over the city, enjoying the farmer's market and people from all over the bay area walking to baseball games and other events at the park, tourists from all over the world enjoying the outdoors and natural beauty that has become

the southbeach waterfront. it's a residential and tourist destination, a jewel of the city and i'm very world the beautiful and safe use of this area will change with a large navigation centre and discourage residented and visitors alike from accessing one of the highlights of san francisco. when i think of other natural treasures in this city, such as golden gate park or the marina promenade or notable city destinations such as the square at union square, places from across the city and beyond come to experience the beauty of san francisco and its people, i wouldn't support a navigation centre there, either, let alone experimenting with one of the other largest tried. it just makes no sense. in addition, i also feel the district 6 and our community has a proud tradition of supporting those in need. we are delighted to have the

delancey street as neighbors. we know each other by name and feed my dog carrots. >> can you please state your name? >> riddle. >> rebecrebecca, are you speaki? in the microphone, please. >> i'm going to get right to the point. if it seems completely outrageous to a navigation centre in the rectangular open space we call union square or a big open space along the marina programme nod or golden gate park or chrisy field, it should follow it is likewise for the same reasons creating a navigation centre along the

comparably and beautiful embarkadaro. the follows are reasons there should not be a navigation centre at lot 330 and i'll run out of time so you can cut me off. [ laughter ] >> navigation centres have been around since 2015, the proposed site is over twice the size of navigation centres. the city service's auditor found a key feature of the centre was the small size, which allowed clients to thrive in a sheltered environment with relatively few richarrigid scale like you're proposing. upon the navigation centre concept, a large scale is an experiment and should not be done in an area where the fail would cause spill-over effects of workers and visitors daily. this is an environment different from your dog patch site.

the port's previous experience with navigation centres has been the lease of the dog patch site. that's a different environment, the end of a cul-de-sac and supplier and several blocks from the nearest resident and the clean success says nothing about how the navigation centre will perform at lots 330 which is surrounded by residents and commercial businesses and the whole entire street. while they do not allow walk >> thank you for your time cheer cheer. cheer cheer. [cheers and applause] >> this is one of the most beautiful used prominent locates in our city. and the fast push to get this through seems unusual to me and i don't know if i'm the only one that feels that way but i just got a letter the day before

yesterday. [cheers and applause] >> i started to wonder what is the reason for that. i don't know but i would like to hear from the city about that. >> it is very high concentration location in our district for navigation centres compared to others. we think that it would be proper to consider other districts before we start here, but beyond that, i echo what the prior people have said about our neighborhood. it is densely populated with children and childcare facilities and families in our city. if you want to see what this is going to look like, look at what exists now. however, they are in wildly different locations than this or anything like this. this is a unique pick and a bad one. not a place for navigation

centre. it's a place to recreate and it's a high destination and do we really want this in the heart of this wonderful jewel as someone of our city? i believe the answer is no. i also am concerned with the -- i would like to know, we've heard and i want to believe what's real, not what's heard all of the tame, but that drugs are ok, as long they're outside of the front door of this facility. imagine that in our home. >> thank you. pair operato(applause). >> david delgr. ger.

>> my name is bob spence. is that loud enough? >> better. >> my issues are many, but i think that the biggest issue is this is just the wrong place. simply the wrong place. there's many places in the city, industrial areas and things like that that make much for sense. there's simple thing that my wife and other people talked about walking their dogs. how many times have you seen homeless people care * carryingg to pick up the waste. it doesn't happen. my grandkids play down in the strategy, the parking lot next to it because it's so beautiful and we play on the grass areas. you take 250 people that are wandering around during the day, panhandles looking for whatever, it just doesn't make sense.

the current location when you go down and look at those, they're not nice and they're not clean. and there's extra tents all over the place and it's just not fit for where we're looking at it. maybe i'm thinking of this all wrong, but if i could have a show of hands of how many people are opposed to this, that would be great. thank you. i think that explains how we feel about it, our tax dollars and everything over a lifetime to find a place that we love to be destroyed.

>> i only in the area but i bought so i can look forward to living here, but i used to live in san francisco for over 25 years and to this day, we go to the land's history for every mother's day because it's important to me that my boys see there is always -- it's not always doom and gloom and to me, i would hate to see delancey street overshadowed per this plan. in i'm noif i'm not mistaken wie architecture of the delancey street, as well. thank you for the opportunity. >> thank you.

>> derick >> i'm sharon loe and i live at bridgeview but whenever the ac concert was, we were eating at high dive and some people were from des moines and said, will it be safe for us to walk back to the wharf area to the hotel. my husband and i said, yes, there's lots of people out and will the homeless people povertr you in no, they generally won't bother you, you just go on your way. we walk that area all of the time, family, dogs, little kids and everything like that. my next comment is, we lived in michigan, my kids went to a catholic school and that took care of the homeless periodically during the winter for, like, three weeks.

they would come andly at our school at night. same story. they don't leave during the day. we found syringes and bottles of booze around our school. so that won't change here. these people congregate, they've come around the during the day and they don't leave and go someplace else and those are my comments. >> thank you. >> margaret and then andrew. >> i live in the watermark so i'll adjacent to the navigation centre. and i just wanted to let you know that i am native of san francisco, was born and raised in san francisco. so i've seen it change. i have a family in watermark, which is rare in the

neighborhood. a lot of families come to the ferry building, to the ballpark and they play and do recreation activities, but we actually go into the parking lot, my kids learn how to ride a bike and we play baseball there and i just feel adding a navigation centre would make them scared. you know, because there's dogs, sometimes they bark at them and there's feces and needles. it's just overwhelming to allow this and with very minimal notice. i'm very, very opposed to the navigation centre. thank you. (applause). >> andrew and then mary. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is andrew zachs, an attorney representing the watermarks hoa.

(apprize). [cheers and applause] >> i'm here in opposition to this project. i wonder why we are here first before we're at derancey street this evening. seems to be the outreach should have happened first before the matter is brought before you folks. [cheers and applause] >> obviously we haven't had a substantial amount of time to study the legal questions involved in this project, but there are, appears to be substantial legal concerns about placing a navigation centre at this location. out you will obviously be looking at sepa questions, the california environmental quality act and based on what we know this conversion of a parking lot to a residential homeless shelter or navigation centre will require full environmental review including an environmental impact report. we don't yet know what is going

to happen and we trust you will give that every consideration at the appropriate time. in addition, there's a significant question as to the value of the land, which is substantial, as you know. and whether or not there will be in fact, be fair market rent paid. we have heard there will be a negotiation for fair market rent but seems that should be happening before the matter is brought before you and before the community is pulled into a hearing like this so that we all understand those issues. because the law does require fair value paid whoever the user is and we trust you will give those users every consideration at the appropriate time. in addition, there are concerns about the soil at the property and whether or not the cost of actually preparing this for safe habitation for anyone, including the homeless, we have toxic soil and i will defer my time.

thank you. >> thank you very much. [cheers and applause] >> i would like to note this is an informational presentation, just as the presentation at the navigation will be this evening. so that the community can get the most information that is possible out of this discussion. mary anne spinner. furtheand then sirasha rye is n. >> hi, name name is mary anne spinner. we live at 239 brannon street, 700 yards from the proposed navigation centre. as a former advertising copywriter, i understand the difference between features and benefits. and benefits are what matter. we have been told there will be

benefits to the homeless population by opening navigation centres in san francisco. and that's great. but those benefits can be provided anywhere in the city. why in this community? why here? most of you are familiar with the acronym ninby. it stands for not in my backyard. i understand there will be folks here today who are also proponents of something called yimby, yes in my backyard. however, i have an opposition, and i believe the community does, too, nothing do with either, but not in my frontyard. this is sanfrancisco's frontyard. [cheers and applause] >> it's the face of the city from oracle park to the golden gate and as other speakers have noted, it's where residents from all over the bay come to stroll, bike and run and push their baby carriages.

the embarkadaro is what potential touristeds envision when they consider visiting this beautiful city. it's not where they or where we want a large aggregate of homeless individuals. i'm a certified master badderrenegardnerandgardeningan, both front and back. one think i know, there are a number of garden structures that belong only in your backyard, recycling bins andbeehives. they do not belong in your frontyard. this does not belong in sanfrancisco's frontyard. >> thank you. [cheers and applause]

>> sirasha. >> i'll make this very brief. i just have two points. the first i'm going to illustrate an antidote where me and my friend were walking in a dog patch and he was this his flip. -flops and happened to get pricked by the needle. it wasn't serious, just a prick, but he had to go through a test for aids, hepatitis c and numerous other diseases. it took one week for tests to come back but that was the worst one week of his life, not knowing what the tests would come back with. the second is we're not against this homeless shelter. everybody wants it but not at the current proposed location. and there have been good stats

about the navigation centre, about 70% success rates. so there was an article in the chronicle about a month or two months back about the people at the mission navigation centre. that's almost 30 people at any given time with violent behaviour. on the ground floor of watermark, that's really scarry to me. a lot of other buildings will still be safe because they have units on different floors. watermark has a building adjacent to the proposed site, which has ground floor units which accessed right on the street. thank you. >> thank you.

>> stephen vocci and william glascow. stephen? no. william. >> i'm a resident at portside condominium in this neighborhood for 20 years. i think this community could do a better job of coming up with a plan for the waterfront homeless than the mayor's proposal. now, you said it's an interim plan but feels like the mayor announced that 200 navigation centre for this location. now we're hearing that there's going to be community outreach that's kind of backwards. at any rate, hopefully it will change. my concerns are the following. one is the size which has been mentioned and it really breaks the model of a successful

navigation centre and two, the location which has also been mentioned. in my opinion, this is really the cross-roads of the southbeach neighborhoods. we he'd this are need this arean area that's livable and that we can raise our kids and families in. it breaks our connection with the waterfront which is completely the reverse of what the waterfront development plan tries to accomplish. but in my mind, the third and most important part of this is that is prize property. we need permanent solutions for our homeless. and we could be and should be developing that property for mixed use that could benefit the community, including more affordable housing. it also delays repairs that they need and they need those

quickly. give you the opportunity as a community to create a better plan for the waterfront homeless. i have here a petition with over 200 signatures on it already. i an electronic petition growing every hour. these people believe we can do a better job for the waterfront home weather. give us that chance. >> if you. >> william and then suzanne. >> i'm william glasscrashes ow anglasscow.i had more details bs of comments made, i'll cut to the chase. i think as a policy matter, and the way decisions get made, i cannot support this because i don't think there's been a balancing of whatever the benefits the city believes will accrue to the homeless against the costs to the people directly affected in the neighbo the neis

and the people at large. i think the size of this proposed facility ensures that it will have a material impact on the community for all of the reasons that have been cited and all things like criminal activity, drug usage and environmental pollution, all come into play and will come into play. i think the burden of proof is on the city for this kind of thing to show that the benefits that accrue from this particular site versus wherever else they might do this or whatever other programs they do to help the homeless, those benefits exceed the significant costs that will enedgwillinevitably accrue to te

toursists that use the adjacent area. what's remarkable, for 25 years, the cities has had policies to build this, soma, southbeach, adjoining areas up as a highly desirable place to live and work. more than 10,000 people live there, thousands of people work there and, of course, thousands of people walk along there to go to giant's games with the 200 events per year. it's crazy to bring -- to import these potential problems no that area and somebody has to make the case that the benefits that they expect to result will exceed the very serious costs that will accrue. thank you. >> thank you. >> suzanne and then alex singh. >> i live in the watermark and

own a unit in the watermark which has the rout right up agat this parking lot. i'm not against homeless people or non-empathetic or callus about the plea of the homeless people i heard this shelter would have a place for mentally ill people and sometimes they have trouble with big crowds. we have the giants and the warriors in this area and if you are in the area at any time, we have access to the bridge, as well. if i ever wanted to use any car, i can't get out and there's crowds and crowds and crowds of people. so if you have mentally ill people ha ge who get irritated,m

concerned about safety, as well, safety of the mentally ill and of the residents. i think as a resident of the port, the portios i ports port e concerned about safety. the other thing to do with this location, it's a highly residential. there are to hospital, no churches, so this is a referral area and no hospitals or churches and when the area is completely clogged up by traffic, let's say there's a medical emergency by someone who oded or something, they won't have access for ambulances taking them where they need to go. thithese are concerns that i ha. thank you.

>> alice singh? and then freezin frank goodman? >> my name is alice singh and i'm a resident, a neighbor but most importantly a mother. i have a 20-month-old daughter and i'm here to oppose violently the proposal of this navigation centre. the size is a megashelter. it is three times of any success of a successful navigation centre that the city has deemed in its reports. the success has not been repeated. we know in business, you have to have repeated success in order to gain more budget, in order to gain more approval and in order to continue a plan. this has not been a repeated success.

moreover, there are 12% that were violent, cited violent crimes or violent behaviours at the proposed centres in the past. what's the city's plan to address those? i have a young child. threshe's walking, she sees peoe defecating in the street and this is nothing new to a resident of district 6. what are the city's plans to channel more funding for civil services to help clean up the area and maintain the safety? finally for location, i've heard from people who are proponants that access is important. go where where these densely populated with the homeless areas? that's in the mar market i usedo live. what about the lawn outside of city hall? there's a hall far larger --

(applause). >> -- then this proposed site. what about the old hospital? the old hospital is not currently in service and there's infrastructure there and currently no infrastructure on the lot. thank you. >> frank goodman and alice rogers. >> my name is frank goodman. i lived in the neighborhood for three years and i'm here today because based on what i've heard about the shelter, if this was there three years ago, i'm not sure i would have picked this neighborhood to live in. i have the same concerns everyone else does and i don't need to repeat those. but i gathered over 100 signatures from members of the greater hill community.

neighborhoods take from a city and give to the neighborhood. we've given san francisco the highest concentration of new housing in the entire bay area. all of the us know the bay area needs housing. we've also built hundreds of units of bmr construction. we could walk outside and see the building that was built today with one-third bmr units. this neighborhood has done a tremendous amount to help home prices in the city and to help house people in the city. i think that it's asking a bit much of district six with one navigation centre already to build a second navigation centre while the majority of the city's districts have no navigation centres. thank you for your time. [cheers and applause] >> alice rogers and then barbara inaba.

>> alice? >> thank you, and good afternoon. i'm alice rogers and live up the street at brant street from the project. i've served on some of your commissions. i'm on the board of my neighborhood socials. and perhaps most importantly to this discussion, my next door neighbors are homeless people and we have 100 in our neighborhood. so i know that there is life after navigation centres. and so i'm basically supportive of the mayor's initiative. but take great exception to the way the process is coming down. you the port are in a position where you have to field without the kind of process that you have hav built after the last te we've had one of these top-down

processed lands on us. i guess that happens in the city family and we have to deal with it. but i do hope that the neighbors don't conflate this proposal with the effort the support is making the community outreach. i do also want to commend port staff for trying to do outreach tto the extent they could before the proposal land that is a news release in our neighborhood. and i do want to commend the city triage group. they cleared the catacombs in our neighborhood, cleaned up the wharf and bryant street and that's good news.

this process is all wrong. the city knows people live in this neighbor and we've been working for more than ten years with the city on structure issues. this process, the city should have contacted the neighborhood and built this proposal. i'm hoping after today and tonight, that a task force will be -- i'm done? thank you. [cheers and applause] >> barbara emeba and tom hurlang. >> good afternoon. any name is barbara inaba and i lived at portside condominiums as a resident since 1994. who can remember way back then? that's 25 years, a quarter century. three, we are directly across strategy from seawall lot 330.

navigation have proven to be magnets for people outside of centre. there's assault, theft, drug use, violence, trash and health issues. portside is home to many families and seniors. i'm a senior. physical safety and health to be by those mentally ill, intoxicated or violent histories. place children, families and seniors directly in the path of a large homeless population is dangerous and responsible and wrong. this is not about placing navigation centres where homeless are because the add mittancme