Because weve been in a longterm drought. So can you speak a little bit more how youre confident that were not going to hit the water floor even in good or even regular rainfall years . Sure. Ive been working in San Francisco for close to 40 years and im working actually on the armory and been working on it off and on since the early 2000s. I actually worked on the cathedral across the street from us. Im very familiar with this soil conditions and the groundwater conditions. So what we do is we know we have a snapshot when we do our investigations. Sometimes we do it when its try in september and october and sometimes we do it during the rainy season. We always know that the groundwater fluctuates. So what we do is we take the measurement we have during the construction, we look for monitoring wells, whatever data we have, ideally the highest groundwater occurred in 2005 and then during the el nino years in 1997 and 1998. We see how much the groundwater fluctuates overtime. We new during a drought, we always want to have design for the highest level we think it will ever get. Basically we have measurements and we look at all the data in the area. When its the highest and thats the number we pick for the design groundwater. Im confident it will not come up to the ground because i think theres the concern there is that theyre blocking drainages to the bay and so fourth. As we mentioned, this is at grade. Those drainages, i mean, all the buildings in San Francisco and this area that New Buildings will have some sort of ground improvement, which is what were proposing makes its on i can la fie ablliquefyable soil. So basically the groundwater flows around those. When they mention that theres rivers and streams its not really rivers and streams, its still soil. Sometimes the soil is a little more permeable. This was filled with sand and it was dumped on top of sand. There was in river or creek under the site. Supervisor yee any other questions . I see none. So, id like to invite the members of the public who wish to speak in opposition of the appeal and in support of the project to please come forward. You have up to two minutes. First speaker, please. Hello. Good to see you again. This is my second time speaking in front of you guys so hell o i just want to say we need your help. The black community. We need all of your guyses help. Everyone who is white or who has White Privilege. We need your help. You guys are the ones who have the White Privilege of the skin that you were born with even you guys back here. Everyone who has the white skin privilege. We need your help. The black Community Needs your help. I need your help. Im battling homelessness. I just met someone whose mom just died today because she was battling homelessness and they just bought someone and i had to break up the fight because of the anger kind the gentrification that is happening. If you have your white skin privilege that can help our society, black america, mexican america, asian america, indian america, they did not create this america. White america did. And its on the backs of the blacks and mexicans that this america has been created on and it inter twines in every layer of our society. And we need your help. We cant do this anymore. Look at tenderloin, the containment zone. Look at how your Black Brothers and sisters are living. You guys are the ones that can change this. Its not us. I cant do anything. I truly cant. It takes you guys. Please, help us. This gentrification is killing us. The native indians are already almost demolished and the blacks are right behind them if theyre not in prison already. Help me. Help us. Please. I beg you. I beg you. Supervisor yee thank you. So, is there anybody that would like to speak in support of the project. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. Lastly, id like to invite the appellant or the representatives to present a rebuttal argument. You have three minutes. People dont understand that there has been no study about what happens when we dewater this whole area and the cumulative study of all the new building thats have come in since 2012 dewatering. Why are we seeing sinkholes . Where do these occur . What is going to happen of the were not so concerned with we understand that theres no basements and theres an old Brick Foundation and theres an elevator shaft and theres garbage there that needs to be excavated and soil needs to be remediated and that might require dewatering. We do know because no one has dug up the parking lot and started digging there. And this whole when they now what was going on. Here. Why did they unload it on the project sponsor. They got rid of it. Its the impact that have been studied yet. What if it causes harm to this project . That is what environmental study is about and why is it not being done . Why do you not take the things that you know and make accumulative changes and make those study this is addition to the plan e. I. R. This Community Needs you to do that. And why do the supervisors not require this . Why do we keep coming here year after year after year and it gets worse and worse. Supervisor yee there are additional things that need to be studded. There was a vibration study analysis. These people changed their foundation several times. Im an architect by training and i understand this. 82 word ward was not going to be excavated when it was a basement but now theres no choice but to go right up to it. The vibration report said it would be. 24 out of allowed. 25 and theyre chipping out Old Foundation and were not there yet. Supervisor yee thank you, very much. This public is item 25 and has been held and its now filed. We will now reconvene as the board of supervisors, colleagues, we now have items 26, 27 and 28 before us. Supervisors ronen, final remarks. Thank you, president yee. First of all, i have to say that im always sorry to see when a project in my district comes before the board. My office did meet with both the developer and the appellant separately before they stalled several months ago. I was hopeful that we could bring the parties back together to reach a compromised agreement as weve been able to do in the past with a number of other projects including most recently, on another mid scale Apartment Building on cesar chavez. If i believed there was a possibility of doing that again, i would continue this and bring the parties together again. Unfortunately, i think weve reached an impasse where the discussions will no longer be fruitful. Before i go into anymore further details of this appeal, i just have to say that i was there was an october 1st letter from David Blackwell of alan matkins that i received that i just have to publicly say was way out of line. Im not always 100 in agreement with United States of mission just like im not always 100 in agreement with project sponsors. I cannot tell you how grateful i am for the dedication and support for united to save the mission. Our mission no eviction. Specifically of la reece a, pedro and kelly hill who volunteer hours and hours of their time to protect the working class neighborhood that they call home. And when mr. Blackwell compared these hardworking activists to criminals, i think that was nasty and it was offensive and it wasnt only offense offensim but to me. To all of us struggling to take the seriousness of these conversations to heart and to make thoughtful decisions around land use and housing in our city. That is not how we do development in San Francisco and i expect never to see this again come up in a sponsors rebuttal. It offended me and i want to thank everything you do for this neighborhood. You are tireless. We love and appreciate you for that. Having said that, and put that to the side for a minute, i also want to thank, i want to comment on whether or not this would be my dream development for this par self land in the mission, absolutely not. We all know that what the city needs, but particularly what the mission needs, isnt more luxury housing, its Affordable Housing. Its Affordable Homes for the thousands of people that have been displaced, for the teachers and working class communities that are getting pushed further and further out of our city. Thanks to this Community Fighting so hard, we currently have four cranes up in the Mission Building 100 Affordable Housing projects, housing that we truly need as a city and as a neighborhood and we have 300 more in the pipelines and these are ninestorey building thats same Community Embraces and welcomes to the community. I also get very incensed when i hear them call Mission Activists nimbys, all they want is more housing but housing for the working class communities that are being pushed out of the neighborhood. So i just have to say that. Unfortunately, this isnt that project that we want to see in our neighborhood. Not only does it not meet the current 25 affordable requirements, it was grant grandfathered into a earlier requirement. Unfortunately, the density, bonus law, statehousing accountability law and even now more strict laws that supervisor wiener and others are pushing in sack ra men csacramento are takl our local power to actually talk about the impact that these projects have on displacement in our community. And ceqa is the tool that is left which is really not very powerful. It doesnt allow for the room, especially as being interpreted under current case law for us to analyze and plan for the human impacts these developments have on the neighborhood. And i hate while this project is 19 affordable on site from the base project, that these state density laws allow the developer to fee out on the additional heighten density so if you look at the total project over all, its only 13 thats going to be below market rate units on site. They will be eight homes that working class families will have in the mission but that percentage is way too low. And its frustrating to me. I wish i had more power to do something about it. I have read all the documents and racked my brain and pushed the Planning Department to think through, is there anyway under ceqa where theres not sufficient analysis that we have to go back and review more and i just dont see it with the geo tech nal report that i have analyzed over and over, i just dont see where there is room to push on that and as weve zendaya this board several times has said that under these laws that dont protect our communities, this Community Plan infection, what environmental factors would make this plan outofdate and so perhaps we have to consider going back and looking at the underlying plan because there are no environmental factors that will make this exemption stale. So, today im going to make a motion, i know im going to days point several members of the community that i admire deeply. Its not easy for me but i am going to move to adopt item 26 and table item 27 and 28. Supervisor yee so theres a motion thats been made. Is there a second. A second by supervisor fewer. And can we take this same house same call. Clerk roll call mr. President. Supervisor yee roll call, please. Clerk it is the same house. I didnt see supervisor safai so you can do same house same call. Clerk can we take this same house same call. Supervisor yee the motion passes. Excuse me. We need to continue the meeting, please. Lets move on. So, i think we are, i believe Public Comment. Supervisor yee we are on roll call. Clerk supervisor. [roll call] supervisor yee colleagues, i know ive been talking about this particular issue for a while now. And im going to talk some more about it. The office of emerging technology. Disruptive technologies and trends are changing the way we work, communicate and live. We are in another Industrial Revolution, one where the speed scope and pervasiveness of technologies advances are unprecedented. The Industrial Revolution of the past came with many benefits including increased Job Opportunities and production levels. Inspire innovation, allow foray sis able and faster communication and reduce the experience of borders. However, before regulations there were unintended consequences that have profound negative impact of our public including labor practices with the use of child labor, unsafe and dangerous working conditions, unregulated house of minimum play and the list goes on. This is because the pace and impact 6 neck logical change increasing while the speed of government is considering and adopting regulatory legislation has not kept pace. This is about what is going on in San Francisco. And today, the unintended negative consequences must stop. Early in 2018 when i tried to ban the delivery robots, i was seen annan anti tech or solving for something that wasnt a problem. A few weeks later when scooters were dumped on our sidewalks everyone understood. The city and our residents demanded action in order to control what was taking place on our streets. Monthly, we read about private data being hacked and millions of peoples identity being identified. Its workforce as employees in order to be fairly compensated and in hong kong, were seeing we are seeing technology and in china technologicalbased social Credit Systems are rolled out that could reward people and punish people according to their stores. To address this by being reactive and legislating other technology or devices already launched is not good governance. We need to be as innovative in our policies as emerging tech and its in adopting and launching products. Today San Francisco is the first in the world as far as i know that will establish an office of emerging technology. The o. E. T. As i call it will allow the city and the public to effectively evaluate any emerging Technology Benefits and impacts before they operate on our Public Infrastructure. I support innovation and technology. Our residents are not guinea pigs and are Public Infrastructures is not a free for all on regular unregulated space. San francisco becomes emerging technologies but as the city we must ensure that technologies provide a net common good measure in identifiable ways and that they are safe and appropriate. Many emerging technologies impact the public in disruptive ways. They utilize a Public Infrastructure or the right away of our airspace or our data. To their basically benefit the profits. I want to be clear that the objective is not to stymie or control those technologies but to balance the Public Service of innovation with the public good and safety. This is why i am proud that we had a robust, thorough and collaborative process through my emerging Technology Workgroup and were over 200 people and organizations participated including small startups, well established tech firms, advocates, labor, merchants and neighbor associations, multiple departments and academics. The recommendations from the report are what informed the legislation for the office of emerging technology. So the office of emerging technologies is unchartered territory but we now have a holistic Regulatory Framework and i am confident in the process that has brought us here. As a reminder of the most examples of emerging technologies today, are mobility focus but the office of e. T. Will be inclusive with the technologies beyond mobility to anywhere theres a nexus between technology and Public Infrastructure. Whether this is the hover boards or publicly facing Data Collection bio metrics and the public right away anywhere that will be potentially and impact to other critical resources, for the first time they will have a clear and streamline process for approval and the office of emerging technologies will number one, act as a front door for emerging Technologies Companies to a Central Point of contact for companies. A streamline process by facilitating approvals by all departments impacted by the emersion technology that is regulated. And in office of e. T. With safely test and evaluate new technologies and clear evaluation criteria and well improve communication between among emerging tech companies, San Francisco residents local businesses. The office of et will support responsive policy development in areas such as equity, accessibility, privacy and data ethics. And office of emerging technology will process smart forecasting through expert collaboration zoos that our city can bs so that our citycan be p. The office of e. T. Addresses both unmet needs protecting the public and supporting emerging tech. We thank tekin owe rate isors e are happy to emergency merging technology for public interest. This is why our city policies need to be on the forefront just as San Francisco is the center for tech and innovation. I want to thank supervisor fewer for cosponsoring and thank city administrator naomi kelly and her Team Including mattias jamie and bill barnes, debra lusky from the public works and kate tourin who helped us formulate the legislation hearing. A special thanks to chris tom as well as many of our other City Attorneys who work on this legislation. I also wanted to thank all other city departments who helped inform the recommendations of the office of emerging technology. So, i want to extend my gratitude to the tech sector, businesses labor and academics who participated in the workgroup. And last but not least, i would really want to thank my staff. Erika mayborn who