at the moment, there are eight hotel projects lined up to take advantage of the soma upzoning, but not one of them has signed on to commitments ensuring that workers will have a right to organize, that these jobs will be good ones. it's being sold as a boon for jobs in san francisco. we're not short of jobs here. we're short living wage jobs that support working people. it's important that planning get right the mix of uses in central soma. unless hotel developers change course about the jobs proposing, we think it would be a mistake to loosen the tourist restrictions on tourist hotels. >> thank you, mario. next speaker. >> hi, supervisors, jane wile, again. i live in central soma. to reiterate a couple of key points. the central soma plan has three strategies accommodate growth, provide public benefits and respect and enhance the neighborhood character. "given the desirability of land, there is demand of building heights only seen in downtown, which come with benefits, but at the expense of what makes the neighborhood great. its character. central soma should not be like downtown. go

to increase affordability, the city should upzone its residential neighborhoods. please allocate resources accordingly. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is daniel bergerac. ied that honor of being the president recommending 300 businesses in the upper market castro neighborhood. three long years ago, the commission approved a conditional use authorization for formula retail restaurant, a hamburger mary's. three long years later and the community is still waiting. this empty storefront is a ghost ship that sucks the energy from our neighborhood. years of promises to the community to open this location by the property owner have also been emptieded. while the community's goal is to have a thriving business at this location, i'm appealing to you, commissioners, who are also lieed to by the applicant to do whatever is in your power to urge this property owner to move ahead with his plans of three years ago. at the very least, compel him to appear before the commission and explain all the delays and is there a pro

my concern is that when you upzone stuff like that, it's going to feel more speculation and add to more displacement. there are hundreds of seniors that live on this corridor, and you know, i'm really concerned that the issues of displacement should be first. we've lost way too many people to put that to the side. i think that has to be front and center as you, a commission, and you know responsible for the planning of this city. i think we've lost way too many people, and i really think that the whole -- this whole conversation needs to shift and -- and end right there. how do we keep the people in their homes that are struggling, and how do we not cause gentrification or miss placement in our neighborhoods? >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. good afternoon, everyone. my name is sai. i'm a member of the working group, but i'm also the coordinator of communities united for health and justice, cuhj, which is an alliance that's based in the excelsior, and we are five organizations. not going to name all of them, but i'm going to name filipino neighborho

safety is a topic that's been coming up quite a bit, with the upzoning, the wind impacts, the safety and traffic. we've had members of our organization that have gotten into accidents, who have fallen because of high winds, because of oncoming traffic, that have spent time in the hospital with serious injuries. safety impacts and ramifications must be taken under consideration within the plan. as they say, the road to misery is paved with good intentions and there are a lot of things that are imposed upon us and the community that's lived there, existing community, is treated as though they were the furniture that came with the place. there must be oversight and a voice for the communities being impacted. somebody mention the the ongoing fees for cultural sustainability is very, very important. we're dealing with communities that are being squeezed, who are working extremely hard to maintain their equity and their presence and to continue being an asset to the cultural fabric of san francisco. job, once again, who are these jobs going to go to and what jobs are going to be generated.

i'm not suggesting that we upzone this block or this neighborhood to 50, 80 or 100 feet, but we have to hold them accountable to the existing height. >> thank you for your testimony. seeing no other speakers in opposition to appeal, we'll go to a not to exceed 5-minute reboutte albie -- rebuttal by appellant or appellant representative. the floor is yours, not to exceed 5 minutes. >> it's not the 3-story, it's the part and parcel. we're not asking for density reduction. just a bedroom. a 3-bedroom unit is not unreasonable. shadow studies were generated that showed impact. where increased shadow impact is minimal. if we can get the overhead back on, please. not the computer, the overhead. 40 feet is permitted, but that doesn't mean it should be granted. the pattern of transition from 4 to 3 to 2 is clear. this is not about what zoning we live in. we're at an edge and we need to be cognizant of that. the photos they showed are from the next block over and are cropped in an advantagous matter. the mitigations imposed were not a gift. they were recognitions that the design has oversights

the adu legislation is a great start, but we need to upzone our neighborhoods. neighborhoods need to build apartments. those are less expensive. thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is georgia shootish. a couple of thoughts about how you could recapture housing. a vacancy tax. a luxury tax. that would give you money to produce more housing. a lot of people that own property don't like rent control, so they keep the property off the market. it's not right, but they do it. is there a way to recapture some of that? give a rebate for property tax, which everyone is downstairs paying now. how do you find if someone has left a unit or a house or several units vacant? you can look at the water bill to see what the -- how much water usage has been there. i think you would have access to that. those are some ideas. there are 5,000 rental units out there sitting empty. perhaps that would help the missing middle. that's it. >> any other members of the public wish to speak on item number 5? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor safai? >> counci

whether upzoning is required, fun so far. in one case, you eliminated all projects permitting expansion of the building size. in some cases, up to four times larger. so let me just go through quickly some examples just to bring home these points. this is a picture of 24 to 26 ward street in corunna heights. it was suspended for 17 months. for working without a permit. unpermitted razing and to create new living space. no hearing was held. no corunna heights member [inaudible], no neighborhood opposition. no change in unit count. it went from three units to a single family. what was created was a large single family unit above 3500 square feet and small in-law of 900 square feet. originally there were three units presented and a two-bedroom renting for $1200. and it was eventually eliminated. quickly going through, this is 412 lombard street. if it was suspended for six months with no hearing required and no change in unit count and expanded the building from 900 to 4100 square feet. the interesting part is after the building

commission to read or re-read this report, switch to form-based zoning for all land in san francisco and upzone the single family residential districts in san francisco. only by following your own recommendations will housing be built for the missing middle. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, plea. if there are any. seeing none, we'll close general public comment. commissioner rich arts? >> three things to say as hearing the first three public speaker -- members of the public speaking in public comment. first, now that the residential expansion threshold has been actually taken away, withdrawn, we need to look demonstratively on section 3-17 as georgia mentioned. i'm seeing perfectly sound houses in my neighborhood being demolished and monster houses being replaced with them. and if the goal is to actually affordable homes that are existing, section 3-17, the demonstrably unaffordable is not helping that in any way, shape or for the purpose. secondly, the first person who spoke from the san francisco association. my apolicying. we get hundreds of copies of e-mails a week. please h