among experts. the national trust clearly explore of prefers the san francisco decision makers select project alternatives that incorporate preservation of significant features of parkmerced such as preservation alternative fee presented in the documents.>> i am mike mueller.

it is understood this qualify as has historic resources and is one of four remaining large- scale apartment complexes in the country. we noted its did nothing to preserve the historic district and reiterated our concerns in july of last year. it would allow for greater density than under addition in all -- additional alternatives. alternative c for the hybrid have not been considered. the mitigation described to

compensate for the district is wholly inadequate. while we strongly believe there are alternatives, the plan may be approved very good -- may be approved. there are over 170 slated for demolition. the findings compensate for the near-total loss. this is important when considering the project with an estimated $360 million worth of public benefits. the resources allocated are placed in stark relief compared to the measures to relieve other adverse affects. guidelines require it to be roughly a correspond to the

environmental impact. >> thank you. >> i am a member of the board of directors and part of the park merced action coalition. the environmental impact report has a lot of problems. one is betting it does not give anything about real earthquake problems that i submitted already. here is another map that was also considered. there are 30-inch pipes, one

down 19th avenue and the other don parker said boulevard. -- and the other on park merced boulevard. these are things that the environmentally impact report has considered. it has earthquake problems and very little consideration for the other things we have learned the hard way that should be a matter for public concern given a lot of negligence on behalf of pg&e. i think you should start with a blockade of the project.

-- wi one of the vague sites is park merced. there are other places along the coast. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> i am on the borderline of environmental impact. i studied art and architecture at yale university for seven years. charles mohr was my professor. i also studied with vincent, who is called not only real cost as lecturer but the most authoritative voice in -- who is not only their best lecturer.

he said, do not let them get away with its. he referred me with a firm in chicago that has had a great deal of success and that is incredibly important that this beautiful landscape designed by thomas church not be destroyed. i spoke with an hour and a 45 minutes. he was astounded at things he had not seen. as jackson pollock said when somebody said he should sell the -- study nature he argued, i am nature. you cannot draw a credible and boundary between people and nature, so i support a huge population of sparrows and warblers, beautiful and rare

birds. there are chickadees, a flock of 25 goldfinches, and they are all there right now. my daughter move in when she was about eight months old. my son was born in park merced. we will not been able -- we will not be able to replace a place where children can play it safe of traffic. >> i am a jr. of high school, and i have lived with my family in an apartment in part of merced for 14 years. my brother was born and raised in our first house in park merced, and we were both raised

in a wonderful environment. we spent most of our time growing in a spacious backyard. i grew up with some children who have become my best friends, and i do my homework with the birds, and i think it is outrageous to deny other children that of bringing by moving them into a crowded new -- that upbringing by moving them into a crowded apartments. i wonder what will happen to done playground? i would like you to reconsider the uprooting of my home. thank you.

>> i want to point out the irony of local climate change analysis. that analysis is fundamentally flawed. it explains the greenhouse gas emission was adjusted for the guidelines, and they have no explanation for why or how they adjusted the inventory. the result is that it is not a significant impact it is extremely hard to believe given the level of density. this is summarized in a letter you already received.

i just want to make sure you have it. >> that would be great. thank you. >> thank you for limiting the comments to the eir, and you will have a chance afterwards to speak about the project. >> i am an acting president of the merchants association. there is a son variants for an exit from ninth avenue. that is crucial for the park's center and the merchants to continue to exist, and we would like to make sure it is understood how important that is to us. >> is there any additional

comments on? >> -- on the are? >> i have spent thousands of hours going over this over the last three years, and we have given a thorough review, and that is one part of the issues that are going on and are going to be mitigated by this project.

i found the development team and the planning department to really consider what is going to happen to the traffic situation if we just let it go common -- let it go, and that is what the study talked about, what happens to the traffic? when you are considering this common and please consider that isn't the largest impact that affects -- that is the largest impact affects san francisco. it is going to take many car trips off of people that would be driving into the city. it is going to create 5700 carpentry's if they take the

light rail downtown. it is going to alleviate congestion. i thank you, and i urge you to avert an -- to vote for cert. >> is there additional comments on the eir? >> i am an architect, and i have been a strong advocate for the present stage of -- preservation, and in the course of my research, i have never been exposed to any writing that would comment on park merced in the larger discourse very good -- larger discourse.

i want to remind thought audience, it was a far more significant project. thank you for your attention. >> thank you. >> i want to make some comments to us to move what is supposedly going to mitigate it. the building i live in went up in 1991, and i think it is evidence blackmun the sidewalks and things needed to be improved for pedestrians to be saved. -- evidence that the sidewalks

and things need to be improved for pedestrians to be safe. as far as muni service, we have had some cut. it does not cross second street and does not run passed on a weekend. gooi am not quick to assume this will be taken care of. look of the america's cup. goofolks of live on the east sie of town house the open space, and we will have it preserved so we have somewhere to get some breathing room while this is going on. >> thank you, is there any

additional comment on eir. >> i was not able to write these comments, but i have commented on the environmental impact of the project, and i want to encapsulate the for the record common -- for the record, and that this is not compatible with treasure island where there is new housing. this is the demolition of an existing neighborhood. it will also demolished large amounts of landscaped areas and trees common -- entries, which will increase greenhouse gases, -- and trees, which will

increase in greenhouse gases. once again, if this is recall, to be done properly, it needs to include analysis of where such density could be " closer to an area of -- could be " closer to an area that would not require demolition of several existing units and rebuilding of them. >> is there any additional public comments?

>> thank you for your time. environmentally speaking, this project would best be described as green washing. that is an industry term used to describe a project such as the park merced vision term, which uses the term green as a smokescreen to hide the underlying predatory nature of projects such as demolition and the development of park merced traded terms such as more usable open space are used to hide the inherent distrust of nature and non-conservationist, non-environmental underpinnings of this so-called park merced vision and plan. please vote no.

>> any additional public comment on the er? -- eir? >> this inadequately reviews the cumulative impacts of this particular project, taking into consideration the other area plans that have already been passed, which have on mr. google -- unmitigable impacts. this city is only 7 miles in breath, and what happens in one area will affect all other areas. they are inadequate in dealing

with fire safety problems. the fire chief testified about the very real problems of dealing with fires in buildings of 07 stories yhuri your -- and buildings of seven stories. just today i got old of the legislation, and i see and hear plans for the building of up to 145 feet. you have the equipment to deal with findings, so you have to have replacement systems. that is not adequately dealt with. this is not green, because you have demolishing of housing with mounds of the demolition being loaded onto trucks and

transported to landfill. we have speakers who talk about outmoded planning, but we do not have a general plan that has been adopted yet. >> is there additional public comment on it eir? seeing none, public comment is closed? >> can i speak? >> of course. that appears to be the last person who wants to speak on the pr at this time. >> my name is mary miles. i have to confess i am not extremely familiar with the eir, but i know it does not adequately discussed the

project. you have to not only say why it is not feasible, but you have to back it up with substantial evidence. it will have impact as, which displaces thousands of the residences. iron bothered by the open space -- i am bothered by the open space. it does not properly analyze the baseline. it has to be the actual

conditions. it has to do with the situation on the ground. it is the same with land use very good region and in the same with land use. and -- it is the same with land use. it is going to affect regional traffic. when it comes to analyzing traffic, you have to consider that. may i speak on the development agreement? >> mr. paulson, did you want to speak to the eir?

>> walter paulson curator -- walter paulson. i used to live there. ♪ i knew they build the sub during the war ♪ harner you want to make -- i know you want to make it could, and i hope you do ♪ ♪ i want to see park merced really good right now ♪ ♪ i do not want to wait for our city lives to be over ♪ ♪ i want to see it could like it should end by in a war of 1944 ♪

>> is there additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> we have not called the item for your deliberation yet. a few close public comment, i will call the item. -- if you close public comment, i will call the item. republican hearing is over. the item is item one also known as park merced mixed use development environmental impact report.

>> should we hear from the staff thurman -- from the staff? >> i joined the commission late last year and had the opportunity to review all of the hearings. i have received the materials and heard a public comment superior -- and heard the public, rita -- and her public comments. >> good afternoon, i am rick cooper from the environmental analysis section. the item is for the final eir for the proposed park merced project. the draft was published on may

12, 2010. the public comments closed on july 12, 2010. the response was distributed. you have before you as a supplemental information packet that contains provisions, including of days to transportation committee if -- including updates to azuela's air quality -- as well as air quality measures that take into account changes. these do not present new information that would alter the situation. i have provided you with copies of letters.

you have received a letter for the historic national trust, which raises a few concerns, some of which have been raised today the other would like to address. the letter sent to us but it reduces the impact of the proposed project us -- as required. it does not provide information to justify the reaction. a dozen analyze a wide range of alternatives -- it does analyze a wide range of alternatives. those were determined to have of feasibility a, and it is capable

of being implemented by a technical seven point. they must consider alternatives for public determination. formal determination of its feasibility, whether there are considerations but make one of the alternatives in feasible to adopt are made by the decision makers as part of deliberations. it is not part of the eir. we have made separate reports. we have made separate reports. once an eir is complete, the