From chinatowns map he posted dozens of parcels within the latina cull surgical district. There is no public process. It doesnt limit. That resolution might be strengthened to say it eliminated it. We have a planning process before we mass up zone. That takes i it away. You are not allowed to create a area plan for the neighborhood. Northeast zone is up zoned. We dont say we are doing massive building here so maybe the area in the cultural district might be under the height levels. That is not allowed. It is a buy right kind of zoning. That makes no sense, particularly in communities that have been targeted historically as well as right now. Right now the mission incorrectly at the 25 level we heard discussion projects are coming forward. Land is bought, projects are developed and put into the pipeline. That is happening as well. I think i want to highlight this builds no housing. It starts by saying, give away billions of dollars to landowners and developers and hope they decide to bu
Model. Let it was figure out what the state can do to help, not hurt. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon, supervisors. George wooding, coalition for San Francisco neighborhoods. I support Affordable Housing, and i also am in very much agreement with the board and supervisor mars resolution. I object to the false choice that scott weiner presented the board of supervisors saying if you are not for sb50 you must be antigrowth. I think that was a terrible position to put you in because i know that you are doing the best for the city. As peter just stated, i dont think one size fits all, and definitely the amendments have to take care of different aspects of the city and the character of San Francisco. I think sb 50 billions the market rate housing much more so when you look at arena than it ever did build Affordable Housing. There is no profit in building Affordable Housing so it forces developers, even wellmeaning once, to build a market rate. Rate. It is a massive give away to deve
Service to those who need it. Thank you. Next speaker. I have lived in the city since 1976. I basically totally oppose sb50. It is so flawed it shouldnt be considered. I support the resolution opposing it. I think it is a good way to deal with a bad thing. I think we have a housing problem decades in the making, and now it is an emergency. That emergency is being used to basically just create or developer give away. I agree it is capitalism out of control, i think. A bigger problem we keep Digging Deeper into the hole. We keep building more and more office space that we dont have housing to support people working in the offices. I think what we should do is stop the development of the offices, play the same game the developers are playing with us, and threaten them with loss of work and huge amounts of money they are making for themselves and investors and get them to the table with us. Another thing that bothers me the only good thing is getting housing close to transit. As another sp
Model. Let it was figure out what the state can do to help, not hurt. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon, supervisors. George wooding, coalition for San Francisco neighborhoods. I support Affordable Housing, and i also am in very much agreement with the board and supervisor mars resolution. I object to the false choice that scott weiner presented the board of supervisors saying if you are not for sb50 you must be antigrowth. I think that was a terrible position to put you in because i know that you are doing the best for the city. As peter just stated, i dont think one size fits all, and definitely the amendments have to take care of different aspects of the city and the character of San Francisco. I think sb 50 billions the market rate housing much more so when you look at arena than it ever did build Affordable Housing. There is no profit in building Affordable Housing so it forces developers, even wellmeaning once, to build a market rate. Rate. It is a massive give away to deve
Bishop, for allowing me this time. Part of my amendment is in the en bloc and it deals with wastewater treatment. No person in america living in this country should be allowed to not have adequate plumbing. This is why ive introduced an amendment asking the usda to pry or oties our ongoing efforts to address failing septic systems in Rural Communities. Approximately 20 of americans are responsible for the installation and maintenance of their own sewage disposal systems, which isnt provided by their municipalities or their county government. At least 200,000 families live in homes that have a lack of sewage system altogether. We offer little assistance to people who live in unincorporated areas to have basic water and sewer. Rural communities across this country struggle with this issue. Just this week, i read lots and lots of articles that dealt with failure of those folks in Rural Communities to have adequate sewage systems. This amendment is a part of a multiyear effort to address t