Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Response topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SoMa divided: Filipino groups and residents urge delay or extra protections as developers promise $73M in benefits
Summary
Dozens of Filipino community members, arts groups and neighborhood organizations urged the Planning Commission to delay approval of the 5M project and finalize a Filipino Heritage District and anti‑displacement plan; supporters argued the project will deliver unusually large affordable housing and arts commitments.
A large, often emotional public comment period marked the Sept. 17 joint hearing on the 5M project, as scores of South‑of‑Market residents, Filipino community organizations, arts groups and tenant advocates urged commissioners to pause entitlements so community‑led protection measures could be finalized.
Opposition speakers said the project would accelerate long‑term displacement in a neighborhood with a century of Filipino history. "The 5M project proposal in South of Market is the latest attempt to drive us out," several Filipino community representatives said repeatedly, citing past displacements such as the International Hotel (I Hotel) and warning that up‑zoning and property value increases would harm seniors, families and small businesses.
Speakers demanded specific safeguards: finalizing a Filipino Heritage District with mapped boundaries and enforceable protections, an anti‑displacement and stabilization plan (eviction protections, land banking and small‑site acquisition), and transparent governance for community benefit funds. Several asked the Commission to continue action to Dec. 10 so those measures could be advanced alongside project approvals.
Backers of the project — labor unions, the Chamber of Commerce, housing advocates and some neighborhood residents — countered that the DA and Design for Development include enforceable benefits and that the project will deliver substantial new housing, including an estimated 212 permanently affordable units across on‑ and off‑site parcels (33% overall), workforce training funds and arts space (including donating the Dempster Building to CAST). Champions argued the project provides jobs, preserves several historic structures and creates public open space on a formerly underused block of surface parking.
City staff and OEWD officials described legal mechanisms in the DA that trigger payments and land transfers at the time building permits are sought or certificates of occupancy issued. Staff also explained an RFP process for distributing certain community benefit funds (arts grants and youth/family program dollars) through city agencies and nonprofit intermediaries rather than through ad hoc awards.
Although many community members pressed for a continuance, the Planning Commission voted 7–0 to certify the EIR and later adopted findings under CEQA. A separate vote to delay the hearing to Dec. 10 failed 3–4. The divided testimony made clear that neighborhood groups will press the Board of Supervisors and city departments for enforceable accountability if the project proceeds.
The next procedural steps are transmittal to the Board of Supervisors for the required entitlements and continued community organizing around the Filipino Heritage District, anti‑displacement strategies and the DA’s implementation details.
