sponsor. the fact they have a very high percentage of people for whom it is a primary residence -- i think there are a large percentage of these people are families with children. ççthe other thing i noticed ie electrical towers appear to be almost 90 degrees to each other and when you look at the direction they are going, and adds more to the tower separation and makes them distinct entities. the other part that was pointed out -- part of that was the post office facility being gone.

i think it's really well done and i'm looking forward to it started as soon as possible and i think we are planning to have it go forward fairly quickly now, so that is good. >> to follow-up on that last project, the performance time only extends through september of this year. does that mean we are expecting this to move forward before that time? >> we are moving forward and we need to finish this approval with the planning department and yourselves in order to have that commitment to move forward. it is our intent to do that and we hope to do it surely if we get past the deadline. we do want to move as quickly as we can on this project. we have seen the san francisco

housing market began to recover for the first time which is a positive trend. >> thank you for the question i asked a few weeks ago. i wanted to remind the commission that in this area, where we are seeing major adjustments to the city's silhouette, it is important to point to the slide he showed where the trans bay powers and the buildings were modeled. it shows a very good fit of these new forms. thank you. president miguel:ç i was also very pleased. that presentation put everything into context, which is something that doesn't always happen that this commission.

i am obviously very pleased by the other commissioners. çit pushes the way we have been trying to push at this commission for some time which means we were not that far off. the very fact that these last approvals -- getting the post office parking out of the way actually did happen. as much as we want it, no one was sure about that. >> i want to thank the project sponsors for working on this. we spent a fair amount of time working on the design, so thank you for working with us on that. this is an unusual entitlement. it was entitled several years

ago but it gives me the authority to approve the final design. the commission is making recommendations to me. i just want to remind you that this is an unusual approach and that's why this is an informational hearing today. commissioner antonini: i would be remiss in not thinking staff and the project sponsor. a number of commissioners have mentioned the packet that shows the design evolution from the phases. that's a very helpful as well as the context with what will be hopefully the appearance of the bill out area in the next few years. that makes it easy to see how it fits in. >> i would like to ask the director if you have the

authority -- would youñr please carry our message that the adjoining boehner think about dedicating an open space easement to dedicate the blocks and i think it will do a great deal of good to have the transition between the lower water front and the east powers off from it blocked open space. >> we would be happy to take that message. >> thank you. with that,ç we can move forwar also under the director's report, have the board of appeals and historic preservation commission. >> planning department staff, i'm here to present the activities of the board of supervisors for planning and land use this week.

at the land use committee, they heard ordinance's related to the chinatown transit station specialties district. this will allow the demolition of the two-story excuse building in association with development plans for the future transit station. the buildings contain 18 residential units and eight ground-floor businesses. the commission recommended approval on january 26. the legislative sponsor stated there were some unanswered questions about replacement housing and ask the item be continued until february 13. at the full board on tuesday, the board heard ordinances' related to the glen park community plan. this is an effort for a planning çprocess approved on first rea

this week, the legislative )áju wiener and supervisor olague thanked the board and a voted unanimously to approve the ordinances. later in the hearing, thereççs an opinion for the wireless antenna at 401 14th ave. ççthe appellant at the board s the first slavic baptist church of san francisco. the concerns were about radiofrequency radiation, the siding on educational facility and a lack of independent analysis on capacity and coverage as provided by at&t. department staff it now

requires independent analysis as part of the applications of metal. while we ask the project sponsor to pursue the analysis, they were unable to do that and pursue the hearing. the department explained this location isç one location -- ad we were finally joined by the department of public health and describe to the publicç how the site would be safe according to science. two supervisors requested the process and the way we review çthese antennas be updated in e future. thecu was up held and supervisor març cast the

dissenting vote. ççthere were three introductii wanted to share with you this week. there was a resolution establishing the community advisory committee. this was an update that provides specificity about the various departments roles. an ordinance was introduced to amend the planning code to -- we will find out more about this in the coming months. lastly, i request for city agencies and stakeholders about the steps to pursue transit oriented development at the

upper yard site at the balboa park area. that concludes my report for this week. commissioner sugaya: i am to understand from your report on çglen park that none of the supervisor asked the planning department to go conduct a vote among the residents of the plant area? >> that is correct. president miguel: i just wanted to mention that i caught on replay your testimony on at&t at 14th avenue. it reminded me i might have been remiss in not commenting on the fact that this commission makes decisions and takesç notes and often those decisions are appealed either to the board of

supervisors or to the board of appeals. we do not appear to defend ourselves. in effect, you are advocates at those hearings and i have caught both of you on tv in -- i caught this one and i want to say you do an outstanding job. i'm personally very pleased to have you as our advocate in this case. i think in this one, you went far beyond the normal explanations and did it and education and job to the board of supervisors regarding cell phone and 10 of locations. you kept it synched and accurate. you dealt with the science so that it was understandable. that is very much appreciated.

when it it leaves here, that is not always the end of it. we're very appreciative of how the department handles our work as it moves on. >> >> thank you very much. commissioner sugaya: well, let me tell you my experience is having served on the board of appeals for four years. [laughter] i think planning staff and the building department staff and probably all of the step people representing the department -- at that time, we were hearing a taxi commission cases, which were always very informative and represented the department's well. >> is there a report for the board of appeals? >> no report. >>ñr no report from the historic preservation commission. they did not meet. that texas to general public

comment. it has a duration of 15 minutes. members of the public may address you on items of interest in the public better under the subject matter jurisdiction of this committee, with the exception of agenda items. agenda items may only be addressed at the time they reached on calendar. each member of theç public may address the commission for up to three minutes, keeping in mind that the entire category has a 15-minute time limit. >> katherine, linda, kim. >> the afternoon, commissioners. catherine, sf ocean edge. happy new year. [speaks foreign language] i want to comment on the clean

connectors. i think this is a great idea to connect our open spaces, but i want to reiterate that if we continue to build one, develop, or activate our open spaces, then these connectors may become our own equivalent of bridges to know where. please keep that in mind when we're talking about this important issue. i wanted to get additional information about the draft eir for the beach chalet soccer fields. át out over 7 acres at the western end of golden gate park and replace it with artificial turf. this is a gravel base of the plastic grass target and other artificial products. the audubon society has environmental equivalent of putting a seven-acre asphalt parking lot in golden gate park. i am going to read a letter

today that he might not have seen yet. it was submitted in the comments in the dr yar. it is from a medical editor for theç british medical journal ad the world health organization. in her letter on the draftç ei, she writes this -- of most concern to me is the lack of peer reviewed scientific and medicalç data on the health and environmental impacts of artificial turf that uses tire chrome infill. the data presented seems to be chosen collectively, rather than representative lee. there's no indication on why these studies were chosen instead of other more recent studies. no indication of the criteria used to select studies for inclusion, and no indication why literature searches were not done to update the references in ñrthe reports. these questions need thorough answers. i ask that, given the dearth of

the purpose is scientifically valid and the current data presented in the eir, an unbiased, independent experts, someone without any interest in the project andq knowledge of the site to the mets did conduct a thorough review and evaluation. [bell rings] this person months -- must declare all potential conflicts of interest before taking up this task. she further asked for peer review journals only to be used. i think this information is very important. i have harer full letter. we support the renovation of speech chalet fields with natural gas and no lights. we want the children to be able to play in golden gate park. commissioner antonini: thank you. >> thank you. >> and linda from knobç hill, d i want enforcement concerning those alcohol use is that we

have a problem with. and will read you a little e- mail that came in to a group of people with whom commissioner miguelç mad, an ad hoc group of people from the area seeking enforcement by various city agencies. we wanted the groupç to know oa radio ad heard in which a bus company invited folks to come on tour to the dive bars near polk street. nice to know we're looked at in such terms. what does that do to real-estate and values in our area? some of the people who came in here about the bar or really taken aback by insensitive comments that they heard from commissioners who they felt basically did not have a clue about what is happening in the neighborhood. i do not feel we have and carry commissioners, but i think we need to at theñr of -- to let yu know what is happening. it was very helpful when commissioner miguel came and met with the property owner whose

building you were about from a tenant earlier and from his property manager, and the manager was there. the manager told me he is sending me something, because he does not know if he is going to live. i think he told you he had had a heart attack and small strokes. he has older tenants in his building who have lived there for years. i brought you copies of this, t(even though it is manthey in case of his death -- even though it is mainly in the case of his death and in capacity. his purpose, he says, is with these withstints and susceptibility to strokes, i never know what direction my health may go in. in case i die, this is my notarize statement in absentia to any of the agencies responsible of invading the bar and street noise nuisance. i wrote a letter about a

conditional use application that has come in to regularize one of these, whichç has been in violation for several years. i have not been able to get your enforcement people to do enforcement. i understand there is an enforcement case against one of the other's right now. i have been told, well, you will have to do the research on the conditional use and of the past german history and all that, and i just not have time. [bell rings] yesterday,ç the gentleman went down and tried to do what he good, and i have tried to do what i can on the computer. he wrote a big file about where i had written about, asking the planner about an active case. he cannot cope with that, and i do not have time. but i will be coming in to talk with the more about enforcement. he is asking for a moratorium on new licenses. [bell rings] i am asking for enforcement. commissioner antonini: thank

you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. tim on behalf of the national housing coalition. i wanted to shareç with you soe data released by the mayor's office of housing on monday, and it is not good news. in fact, it should cause concern to all san franciscans. if i could get the overhead here -- çum, this graph shows the effects of the economic recession and the demise of the redevelopment agency. and it is in pretty stark terms. you can see the red line and in the middle is the redevelopment agency that next year converges on zero as it goes out of

business. most sources, the bottom line, is converging on zero. and,ç not good news. this is what we have got coming for housing. it is pretty stark. here is an even more startling one that shows the effects to the city's funds for affordable housing of the economic recession. if you look at the top one, you can see the affordable housing fund balance. but the one that is really quite unusual, if you look a the bottom one, there is brown, and it actually goes into negative fora couple ofxd years. they're giving fees back for projects that crater. and this is our future. you're probably aware that mayor lee is convening a technical advisory committee on inclusionary housing. they will be meeting at 2:30 at

moe. and he has thrown his support behind housing trust fund that will possibly be going to the ballot in november. the housing coalition is strongly interested in turning these curves around and get them pointing in a different direction. it intends to byrd is the data in these discussions another reason to be here is to remind you that these graphs starkly illustrate the idea of opportunityç costs, and you're going to be looking at the aid to washington project for a very long. and not counting the $10 million net present value that goes to the poor inok fees and payments and not counting the $25 million net present value that goes to the port and infrastructure financing -- [bell rings] it pays $10 million for affordable housing. this contrasts with an alternate version of public plan around with this project is centered

which would preserve the parking lot on public land in order to ñrprevent any change to an adjacent private swimming and tennis club. this is a graphic illustration of what it means to have an opportunity cost. thank you. commissioner antonini: thank you. >> good afternoon. tom, executive director of livable city. i was here last week and spoke about this big change[ to they we do ceqa and ceqa impacts. my emphasis was on the observed by the department of models the generation and they do not take into account the amount of parking or thingsç like a parkg structure. as i said last time, we hope you will go the rest of the way and say, all right, those uses to generate automobile trips and we need to account for that. so that the fees are paid, and that is a principle thatç was w3well-established. there is language in the

planning code that is a follow- up to the impact fees in eastern neighborhoods and a better neighborhoods, and the department was instructed to follow up with the study to calculate, what would it look like and how can the nexus reflect the amount of parking? into reducing vehicle trips have an impact, positively or negatively. we hopei] that will be part of . the other thing i wanted to talk about was the role of the community, community participation in prioritizing transportation improvement. one of the things i understand about this new fee is it would come to a large degree, replace the better neighborhoods impact fees. if they were $10 and the city- wide fee is $7, the!virst $7 would go towards the general pot, and only the additional $3 would go into the neighborhood pots. one of the big understandings that came out ofç eastern

neighborhoods and a better neighborhoods is that as a lot of growth is happening in the neighborhood, we should be bringing in the infrastructure, the streetscape, bicycle, pedestrian, and a transit improvements. and the community should, through advisory committees, have a say in prioritizing some of the projects that come out of that. i would be concerned that if we go to this system, where central residential with the transportation authority, who do not always do a brilliant committee outreach, and taking away a lot of community say about transportation improvements. with the redevelopment going away, and they had a whole other system with cac, and you have probably heard about that with visitation valley, and of the question of community board is a patient and a whioo runs thosei think it is important to understand in the context of

this new feet and also an important conversation for the (@áy to have going forward with the demise of redevelopment. how do we keep citizens engaged at a neighborhood scale in helping prioritize the things that the most important to the livability of these various neighborhoods? thank you. commissioner antonini: thank you. >> patricia -- [unintelligible] the man in this book about 8ç washington, one of the biggest problems we have is every time we get these buildings, they said they will put the money into housing. they do not do it. there are so many buildings that have been built in the last six years that none of the money has ended up in anyone's coffers. and no one has been enforcing it. i think that this is something that should really be looked at, starting with rincon to our. i think we should look at this closely. i think there's a lot oft out there that people do not realize, this has never been

collected. i think the city should start doing some losses. that is not with the deal was put rebuild this, you put a certain amount in, and it is not happening. thank you. commissioner antonini: thank you. >> sue hester, speaking for myself. procedures are breaking down in the planning department. there needs to be a publicly, readily identify, person to everyone can figure out who the person is that is really in charge of the records, really in charge forç complying with file requests, complying with public records act request, complying with e-mail requests. i have a hard time figuring it out, and as a pretty experienced in the planning department. the structure of the planning department, i guess i need to see if the map is buried somewhere on the website. it used to be readily found. i do not know, it might be

there. but this is notñr a function tht is given high priority for staff. it should be. someone has to be in compliance. someone has to be in charge of e-mail policy. i have not found that person yet. i know that the department has gone to electronic records and that if you ask for a case file, you'll get the part of it that is the top of the iceberg. the bottom of the iceberg is e- mails and attachment to e-mails, and they're not in the files. i have been bad in my head against the wall with the senior person in the department for eight months, trying to get a clear policy that's everyone who deals with the department is told, you do not have the record unless you have the e- mails, and you have to have a pass to get them. second issue -- i guess this is my third issue. staff people are extraordinarily uneven and i would say negligent

for pulling old plans. every conditional use permit that is for a project has an exhibit be set of plans. those exhibit be set of plans are the project. it is not just the text, it is the plans. what i have seen as the norm is someone is having an amendment of a case that has a cu on it, the number of people that pull the plans from whenever they call it these days, summer in the east bay, the number of people who pull the plans is maybe 10% to 20%. i know, because i go down to seal the files, and i said, where are the files,ç and they say that i ordered them. you pay money to order files these days. [bell rings] it isç not a decent staff repot unless