is two years late in a vain attempt to placate opponents who cannot be placated. you have a clear choice in front of you. this is being opposed by folks, and this is difficult to say many from the nicest neighborhoods in san francisco, was clearest and most defining civic values seems to say, we have got ours. let s close the doors and prevent anyone else from coming into our neighborhoods. that is wrong and should not be condoned. it is a weird, like the birthers, for whom no evidence can persuade them. there is no evidence that single-family homes are at risk because of this. this is two years late. it is a state-mandated document. it is a decent document. i urge you to approve it finally. good afternoon, supervisors. i am a resident of the marina district since the 1970 s. my understanding is that under the 2009 housing element, rh1 and rh2 zoning will be changed to allow up to eight-story buildings to be erected where i think four is the current height limit. such as
just to remind you, how many more people do you think would want to come and live in san francisco if it is not beautiful anymore? the question was where do we put more people. do you think that more people would want to live in such high density neighborhoods? supervisor mar: thank you. could the last couple of speakers please come forward? hello, supervisors. as i mentioned last week, the residential design guidelines approved by the planning commission in 1999, i would just like to focus on one procedural point, and that is that all of the community organizations with which i am familiar and which have opposed the current draft of the housing element all are signed off on the second draft. one hates to see expensive staff time wasted. it seems to me that the logical thing to do, especially in view of what has been done after the fact with the eir, would be simply to go back to the second draft, and that is where i would like you to consider going. thank you. i am a f
i am a former elected member of the order directors of the association of bay area government. i was elected in 1978. 1974, 1976, and 1978. we were a group that was supposed to supply input to hud. we were elected spontaneously. i was one of the once elected. we found themselves in a strange situation. the pressure was to build, build, build. unions like the ones you have seen today, many of them would gladly repave golden gate park with the pyramids in egypt if they could get the scale, let s be honest. the same situation with men developers and spur. they want to build, build, build. here again with this element 3, again, they want to build, build, build anything anywhere as long as it produces more business. frankly, the city is already pretty well buildup. yeutter not need the extra population. you do not want it. the city is already very densely populated. there s a lot of quick money to be made on this, but it is not in the public interest. thank you very much. my n
dictatorship instead of democracy. 30 words have power. it is very important that they be reviewed and approved by a reasonable and open process. send this back to the planning department. good afternoon, supervisors. i am not in support of the housing element has was approved by the planning commission. the last minute changes create a different housing element than was explained to the public, and the public was allowed to comment. do i have everyone s attention? on the overhead here, i have a typical street scene. this is a single family home on the left side. in the middle of the photograph is a vacant lot. under the third revision of the housing element is a developer, and i will show you what can be done there. we do not need any height additions. it can be done in the current height limit. but as the third revision allows, i use the parking kerch area for units the parking garage area. and the backyard to allow me a 3000-square-foot unit, all allowable in the zone.
as far as changing, upstairs, he will judge you [bell rings] supervisor mar: thank you. good afternoon. the housing element policy, if adopted, vigorously promotes population growth in the city. we need a lot more water. you are the decision makers. i want you to be careful. i suggest and i urge you to hold a sidebar hearing on the issues of available water supply and what is projected in the future. to give you an example, you know that the puc has a projected shortfall now. demand is down now, but it is down because mainly systemwide, because of the wholesale customers. last year in the city, we used 77.7 million gallons a day. we have an available supply of 81 million gallons a day from our watersheds, plus about 1.5 million for pumping groundwater. that is our available supply, and we have contractual obligation to keep under that 81 million gallons a day. the allocation itself up 31,193 units by 2014 is going to require 3.7 million gallons a day more. the annualized