>> good afternoon. this is a meeting of the planning commission for april 14th, 2011.

>> commissioners, the first category is general public comment and it has a starting limit the 15 minutes. an agenda items may not be addressed during this category. with respect to this category, each member may address you for up to three minutes keeping in mind that each category has a 15 minute time limit. i have one speaker card. >> good evening, commissioners. i'm the president of the rincon

hill neighborhood. association -- the rincon hill neighborhood association. the deficiency of open space has been an issue. working with caltrans to have an awfully shebaa park -- an off- leash dog park. children's playgrounds, working with -- of the barbary coast neighborhood association.

we have secured a 5000 square foot patch of concrete and now it is up to us to raise $300,000 to actually build this playground. the other big issue is pedestrian safety. unfortunately, the streetscape in the neighborhood is still reflective of uses 40 years ago. the population has increased from 10,000 in 1992 over 40,000. we still have some work to do in regards to safety. we want to show you a graphic on the overhead. this is the distribution a pedestrian injuries and

pedestrian deaths in 2010. you can see district 6 is far and above the most dangerous area for pedestrians. i hope that the planning commission to the degree that you have influence can encourage the crosswalks to be painted. also a consideration of pedestrian-exclusive crossings can be considered. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i came here to let you know that

i appreciate all the work that you do on behalf of san francisco. i don't always agree with your decisions but i wanted it and you for all of your work. i came here to discuss the decision last week for 3525 dolores street and upholding the integrity of the market-octavia plan. this took years of input.

spur confirmed that these two and three bedroom units are not occupied by families. there are many other considerations besides parking and the size of units. there are schools, there are safety issues. i think largely affordability issues that contribute to the decisions by families. we do have plenty of policy in the city with two and three- bedroom units with parking and families are not saying here. before we promote these myths,

we shall study carefully the relationship of these units and the size of the units and parking and see whether or not they affect the families' decisions to live here. this is before we start making decisions based on hearsay or what we think. again, i really appreciate all of your work and i would like to thank you again. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? >> what i want to bring before you is this talk that is pretty hard.

this is going round even with the sf puc. this is the infrastructure financing whatever. >> this is on the calendar. you cannot speak about this. >> i will speak about commission -- infrastructure in general. >> -- we have come here many times to tell you about what transpires and transpired at hunters point and what transpired at treasure island.

the treasure island development authority, you might not know that but at one point they wanted to create -- which is the hunters point development authority. you might not have heard this. anyway, we went to sacramento and we shot it down. the reason why i was going to talk about this as something that will be on the agenda is because people, mainly big developers, are trying to reinvent themselves and create models of the bills, plain no attention to liquefaction, flooding, and tsunami parent of treasure island is a no brainer.

this is a man-made island. it is sinking two inches every year. i respect those of you that back to the community. you do the right thing. people come here, create new models. you represent the community. thank you. >> i would like to bring some

more good news. the funding has been approved so hopefully the project will be moving forward within 62 -- within 60-90 days. thank you for your support. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? public comment is closed. >> commissioners, if we can move forward on your calendar to commissioner's questions and matters. item numberone is consideration of draft minutes on your special meeting of january 24th and your regular meetings of february 24th, march 17th, march 24th, 2011.

i would like to state for the record that there needs to be a correction on the regular meeting of february 24th, item 13. this is confusing. if we can eliminate the votes as they are shown and replace the word nay for aye. everyone here voted for it. commissioner fong was absent. i would ask that you adopt the draft minutes. >> is there any general public comment regarding this item? >> i move adoption of the minutes of february 24th special meeting, the ragged the meeting, the regular meetings of march 17th and march 24th. >> second.

>> thank you, commissioners. the motion for adoption of the draft minutes as they have been corrected. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners. the draft minutes have been adopted. are there any other commissioner matters? >> there is follow up on the vote to delores street. how would like to add that the comment appeared to have recommendations to acknowledge a deep market-octavia plan. it is the entire plan -- department who recommended this. >> i wanted to thank the --

family who took a tour of the building. i was impressed by what was done there and how well it was done. one interesting thing that they do is that they use -- this is utilized a lot in manhattan. they return water back as it condenses and they get a credit. this is something that we have to look at because it has been very effective in manhattan where you can have a central site to use that heating particularly in our mild climate. this is an efficient way to do things and there might be a future for that. i was impressed by the building and they started on their second phase. i also had a meeting on tuesday

night with the neighbors and the project sponsors for a project that i believe is before us next week which is going to be proposed for valencia st.. it was good to see everyone getting together and answering the questions ahead of time that were raised. maybe we can do more of that in the future. i hope that this will be beneficial. we had a meeting with the parties involved and i think it was quite successful. i would like to ask for a hearing on parking in san francisco. this is a writer -- a rather large issue. we need something well in advance so the public can be aware of it and people can come and testify about their issues across the city. we hear these issues with discrete projects in neighborhoods and we hear just the areas surrounding the

particular project or the neighborhood and you end up getting people on either side of the issue that are just indicative of that particular area. the impact of parking is citywide and area wide. i think that we really need to hear from people who normally may not be involved but the same ones have a lot of issues surrounding parking and they would welcome the chance to express their views in general about problems they may have, particularly when they go to other cities that are certainly -- that do not have the transit policy that we do. everyone seems to be able to park when you go around places like sacramento, san jose. i don't see the problem. something is going wrong, especially with the comments about pedestrian injuries. maybe our policy needs to be reconsidered or somehow

structured so that we can work out something that gets results. anyway, i would ask that the commission schedules a time to hear comments from the public and comments from commissioners about parking in general and perhaps revisiting our city policies and decide that whether transit first and residential parking is not necessarily mutually exclusive. they can be worked out in a better way. >> yes, during the week i met with some people regarding the 800 presidio and also yesterday, commissioner more and i had an opportunity to watch the department's residential design team in action and we saw them review three projects so that this somewhat newly instituted

situation was more obvious to us and that is how it works. from my point of view, it works very very well. the group gets along well and there is no compulsion against speaking out to each other as to how they feel on a project. they are very professional in the manner in which they do it. >> i would support telling something eventually. probably the full commission would be best. we have some absences engine, we will only have one week where we are all here. then we have the tourism request of commissioner fong. it would be interesting to have a balanced discussion on that issue.

>> i missed the first part of what you're suggesting. >> you're talking about where the appropriate places for parking would be. this would be a discussion that is more balanced. >> could we extent that discussion as a well-grounded a discussion to include an update on where we are with our overall transportation infrastructure and the funding expecting to improve and these are built not just on the existing infrastructure but also the better street plan which reflects an attitude which is more biased towards pedestrians

and the pedestrian friendly and a public room environment. there seems to be a balanced discussion and i would like to see which project did where did not get the parking approval. where are the additional garages planned. we have a balance including where we are managing the access and the availability in downtown through electronic means which creates a more efficient operation for those people who come in and don't know where to park. there is a whole assessment of supply and demand in order to have the discussion that commissioner antonini is looking for parents so -- that is looking for. >> once we get past that, it >> once we get past that, it will be nice to have some