this will provide an environment for that application. you have the institutional master plan submitted for the review. and you will not have to take any actions. you don't have any available institution. the environmental impact report. these of the region this is what is imposed on the city. he said the master plan ordnance is to provide ample notice to the community. how can we have noticed about this plan, with the environmental quality act. this first provides for approval, the adequate and

complete and accurate description of the environmental impact of this proposed plan. this has been ignored. you also have to adjust the fact that enforcement has been a joke. there are other things that have been ignored. we have the violations of the law. with 700 units of housing. this is converted to the institution that can build their own housing, instead of being responded -- and you will listen to this year after year and now another issue that will be fine.

the institutional master plan process is being observed. this has been going on for several years. the university of california was told by jerry brown, the university of california. the environmental impact. what we have here -- did not take any actions. you don't have the institutional master plan, before you come to this commission. and it will address those impacts. >> if you could keep the door way clear?

>> i am the president of the patrol boosters neighborhood association. i want to discuss one particular site, and a flaw in what they are trying to do. we get a tiny bit of discussion on wisconsin, for the institutional master plan. you say that there is no impact on the planning area. but this is not true. there was an exercise we did for the neighborhood rezoning. maybe this will ring a bell. we have been trying to preserve some industrial areas, and not just parts of the formally end -- formally industrial land.

the institutional master plan has to have it both ways. this is where we are having the industrial use, and it is the industrial use to have the bus yard here. this is an hour been, a mixed use. you are supposed to keep the parking lots away from residential and office use. you could conceivably have grandfather this in. they did not least this until 2008. they don't have a path to legitimize this. this is the illegal use and it will continue to be an illegal use and we will continue to take action. this gives us a clue to a larger problem. this is 128 of the master plan. when they discuss the actual

sites for expansion, this includes these things called study areas. these areas are more than the entire market, to institute with tax breaks and so on. a big chunk of the dog patch. these study areas are the plan, from watching the violations. this is about land acquisition and land development. they are aggressive on getting these sites. accommodating this growth, this was not in the previous session. they're trying to cover all of the basis for the academy. they will just grab the

attention. the master plan of this site, this was not the study area. this has to stop. we have to delete these study areas. thank you. >> i have been a resident of san francisco since 1972, living at 1160 pine street since 1978. my apartment faces the street, and the art academy took over a senior resident house building at 1055 pine street, which is one block away from me. this is 81 units, and i believe

that these are single rooms with 165 students. 155 beds. next to the building at 1069 is a gym and a student lounge, and the -- they said they did not know what to use was prior to taking over the building. they say that this had been a bar and restaurant in the 1950's. this was the art studio. the art academy moved in. they have totally changed the neighborhood. there is a condo that was built there and i feel sorry for the people that bought the property.

that quarter has become a college campus. this is very loud, on friday and saturday nights. at two or three are in the morning, someone decided to give us a bugle recital. this would have been amusing. the kids are drunk and loud, the street is quiet so the voices echo. i can make up what they're saying. this has become a college campus. there is the single-family dwelling that is there. the art academy wants to continue to take over the downtown in the city.

the non-residence are non- voting, crowded into small rooms, living with three other kids. thank you. >> i am resident of san francisco and the art academy. the recession is difficult for us. we are trying to find a chance right now. we want to feel that we are coming to a community that is concerned with the development as young artists.

we have a place where we are completely discarding the marriage to create an art institution. without the consideration of the artistic interests, we are giving students an opportunity to have student debt, rather than the individuals. a student who has taken out private loans. this is paid back four decades on end. i ask you to consider the ability for these to develop in such a matter. for those to become artists, we are confusing them and we are abandoning the privileges that the artists gained. we have to know what this does to artists and the community at large. the people displaced from their

homes. to allow students to come in on loans and just -- an industry of false art. i would urge you to consider this plan and just taken action to look at the academy of art. is this just a real taste -- real estate scam? thank you. [applause] >> hello, a commission. i am katie monroe and i come here on behalf of the san francisco art institute. i have worked in the admissions office for about three years. i have seen what this is like to sit down with the prospective students to look at their work and look at how much money that they have. and to create a plan that works for that student. and to admit them because the institution sees that they have

the potential to do well, to be nurtured by the institution and to graduate and go on to other professional endeavors. there is no portfolio that has been set, or required to be admitted to the institution to be considered in this deeply concerns me. i am it in a considerable amount of debt by i feel that my education i received is one of great merit, and of great meaning and great individual growth. and this is what i have received. i worry for those who have not received the same. thank you. -- >> i live at the corner of sutter and mason, right next

door to a dormitory. the buses to come to pick up the students who sit in front of the dormitory and sometimes instructed the city bus so that when i take the bus, i have to go out into the street to get this. i am asking that the environmental impact study consider the exhaust from these buses that are sitting idle. thank you very much. >> thank you. -- >> i am barbara graves, i live next door to an academy building and i will divorce myself from my feelings of positive creativity and contributions to the community that the academy brings and think about for a

moment as one of the largest landowners in the city. what this means is some responsibility comes with that position. and if we divorce ourselves for the moment, this is pollution where we don't know the source. when you are talking about the academy -- we know where the pollution is coming from. a single transit bus, even with a modest filter and biodiesel, puts out approximately 0.8 lbs. of black carbon a year. this is a lot, and when you think that the water source will be depleted by climate change,

the production of black carbon makes a big difference. there are ways to change this and one thing is to -- the previous speaker, i can tell you what i dust in my house, my window is right by the bus stop, for the academy of arts. i don't give brown dust, i get black dust. this is a possible carcinogen, and it contributes to climate change. this is not radical thinking for anyone here. one of these is the clean bus program. i have time to the buses in front of the dorm for 20 minutes. this is astounding to me. this is a standard program to reduce idling. i will leave this for the

secretary ed i am leaving the clean bus program, -- they will be participating in this. the other way is to encourage the students to walk. do they need to get on at sutter and mason and ride? encourage them to walk and bike. the best way to transport small numbers of people, this is with the prius. this is put out by the co2 emissions for each mile. >> i am linda chapman, and i live at the heart of the campus.

this is a good institution. someone in our building thought this was -- and there is the academy of students. they were all at the academy. this is where the boss has to go. this is a very serious problem. the encroachment was a different kind before the academy. this is the executive suite. and they're turning this informally. and they would be out, one way or another. things were done and they were gone. the same thing happens with the academy.

these buildings cannot be grandfathered in. as an official in the federal government, i would say -- they have been doing something illegal. and henceforth they will not be able to continue this. they cannot continue to rent those units on those terms. they have to post this in the newspaper with discrimination finding that would be done, and they would have to know the rental agencies that they would have to go through. this is how they deal with the unlawful discrimination. under no circumstances can they be grandfathered in. they never went through the

process. and the commercial buildings -- that are not needed, this would probably be a good idea. if not currently used, this would be an excellent place. this is not the same way that the hospital use will be. i would not have a use for this plan -- and you would allow this to go on for so long. >> we have been dealing with this institution of the planning department for about six-eight years now. they have filed consistently,

for the master plan. and only came to a head when they acquired st. bridges. this has made them very publicly visible. what you have heard here, is that they refuse to take the limit. this is where they are located. we will treat this as a real university. this is not functioning as anything i have been too. this is the governance.

the bottom line is the pocketbook. we don't have something that functions as a real university. you do not have anything before you. there is nothing with the academy of art. they reserve the right to do whatever they please, as a real- estate offering. since the last hearing, there have been a couple of the enormous building. a cannery, which was not on the radar. this has massive traffic problems. this is one issue that you deal with -- you will have this in

one month. you have the institution that basically barges through all of us. they have the buses that come through on their own schedule. and they're mostly in the end everyone knows about this. i follow them all the time and they are very empty. california hall, two blocks north. at polk and turk. this was an educational building and then the educational academy. we do not have any stability that represent -- if you let this go forward without the defined boundaries. this is the institutional master plan. >> and is there any additional public comment? scene 9, public, is closed.

commissioner sugaya: i am sorry, i have to -- i came prepared to participate. i have read the institutional master plan and the enforcement papers that were sent to us earlier. i was wondering what to wear. and i was trying to match myself for the hearing. in hearing one person's testimony, on pine street, it suddenly occurred to me that i am within 300 feet or 500 feet of the least two buildings. in conferring with the city attorney's office in these situations, usually, if this is something we are voting on, i would have to recuse myself.

even though we are not taking the specific actions on this, the way that they are set up, i should ask for recusal. commissioner moore: this is a moving target and we may have to recuse ourselves. there are implications that would hint that any of us will -- or are already living within a certain radius, which would require us for refusal. >> on the motion on the floor for commissioner sugaya? moore? >> no. sugaya? >> aye.

>> fong? >> aye. >> antonini? >> aye. >> olague? >> aye. miguel? >> a reluctant aye. moore votes against. sugaya is recused. commissioner miguel? commissioenr miguel: i appreciate the comments so far this morning. and i think that i agree with many of them. this commission is not an accreditation board. we do not determine if the university should or should not do, this is the internal

governance, with many -- with the curriculum and everything else. this is not an eir hearing. bus polition -- pollution will come out at the hearing that will eventually be in front of us. we are dealing with the institutional master plan. i support the a original presentation about what the report is to do, and this is an odd type of document in the information, and yet this is expected with the unusual situation. the only unique action.

the only action of that kind that i have ever heard of. the only one that comes to the floor of this commission. this is what was submitted. i consider a public relations booklet, masquerading this way. i just saw them come in, to the room. i have known him for sometime and i consider him friendly. his organization is the document's author. i did not know that he was in the public-relations business. it has been difficult for me to consider what i find as a very pretentious volume, in the commission.

admittedly, there are facts and figures buried in there. but going through all of this, i have no other way of talking about this -- this has been quite difficult for me. i am it only going to deal with a few specifics. and i may have more comments later. i refer to page 7. because of the industry needs that the serbs, the university facility needs are unique. this is a specious argument of the nightly false -- any multi- faceted institution, educational institution is in exactly the same position. the need for physical space for different teaching disciplines. there is nothing unique about them or their needs. this is a public-relations statement.

also repeated is the argument that they use the historic buildings. they have lost their public funding, and this is extremely questionable as argument, at best without any relevance. this is pure public relations. if you get to around page 41, and further, the document makes several attempts to gloss over the planning code violations, associated with the acquisitions and the control of property. these are the violations. these are the notifications and the enforcement. i will not even bother counting them. some of these properties, have formally served san francisco as a form of low-income housing.