homeless camper and there are a few odd people ducking in and out of the shrubberies but they're pretty much harmless. i've been there late at night and it's not unsafe. it's not seedy. people have been standing up here making it sounds like it was really not safe but that's not true. it's just the whole stadium lights and the expanded parking and the bleachers, it would be so out of character. and it would be such a nice thing to have at west sunset and the middle school is right there and the library is right there. it would be a perfect place for a nice soccer field, west sunset, and leave the soccer field the way it is in the park. thank you. >> hello, my name is lorraine woodrough long, the executive

director of san francisco police activity league and the parent of two children that are eighth generation of san franciscans. i had the misfortune of growing up in texas. we serve almost 4,000 kids every year and we serve children in every zip code. we represent the diversity of san francisco children and in the past three years thanks to our partnership with park and rec. and city fields, our spring soccer program has doubled by 1300 kids. this year, our spring soccer program had 2600 kids in it. however, because of rain, we had to -- the fields were closed in 25% of our games were rained out. not because our children don't want to play in the rain but we had to preserve the fields and one of those was city fields. the demand is there for the kids and you're turning away children who want to play because there's just not the place for them. it's one more thing for families that are trying to stay in san francisco and make it a

viable place to raise kids, it's another straw that makes it tough for families here. i point i'd like to make. i have something here. i don't know if it can be seen. but a point for you as a planning commission, this -- our ponents to this project are repeatedly calling this piece of land a meadow and i want to emphasize that this picture is the first p.o.a. journal announcing the p.a.l., with pictures of kids playing soccer at the beach chalet and this is 1959 and it was not a meadow then. it was a soccer field and it was a playing field and tried as i might, i tried to get an aerial picture of san francisco that shows the beach chalet project in 1938, the year my aunt was born here, and it is clearly four soccer fields marked and a football field and it was not a meadow then. it was designed -- this is its intended use, an improvement on what the property was zoned for,

what it was intended for and we really urge you to support this for families, for kids, so we can have more kids have healthy activities in san francisco. >> thank you very much. are there any additional speakers? come on up. >> good evening, commissioners, i'm the chair of the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods land use and housing committee. and i'd like to address some of the issues in regards to the beach chalet field renovation. i'd like to read part of a letter. the coalition of san francisco

neighborhoods believes the e.i.r. for the beach chalet project is incomplete and inaccurate and we urge the planning commission not to certify the e.i.r. and urge the rec. and park commission not to approve the project. cfn believes an alternative plan which is a win-win for soccer players and nature supporters has been presented but has not been seriously vetted. this is reported in the handout i gave to you and i will now address the e.i.r. issue right now. i'd like to go on to the alternative plan. the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods believes the alternative sites have not been fully investigated. cfn supports alternative site to project golden gate park's beach chalet athletic field as a natural turf field within the naturalistic parkland as a multiuse meadow and as a

wildlife habitat, while providing additional playing hours. csfn believes this can be accomplished by a combination of alternatives two, three and four. and csfn asks that the new e.i.r. consider a compromise alternative as follows -- one, renovate the west sunset playground with improved playing surface and night light for some or all of its fields. two, renovate the beach chalet athletic field with natural grass. three, do not add lights to the beach chalet athletic fields. csfn opposes the e.i.r. for the beach chalet project because it is inaccurate, inadequate and incomplete. now, it's not as though the beach chalet is the only site that city could provide extra hours of soccer for players.

but the west end of the golden gate park, a renowned treasure, cannot be duplicated anywhere else in the city. it's not a choice. we want soccer fields. we want kids to play, but it doesn't have to be in golden gate park. >> thank you very much. any additional public comment? >> i'm regina rirson and i asked you to please not certify this e.i.r. i'm a long-time resident of san francisco and i live just a few blocks from the beach chalet. and i also am a voter and a business owner. i'm big on beauty and i walk myself and with my friends and loved ones all around western

golden gate park, including all those trails, all around the beach chalet, and also at the beach at night with my sweet heart. we really enjoy looking at the ocean and the moon and the stars and really appreciate that. and i'm one of those, if you've ever seen them, a few eccentric people who when they walk they pick up trash and pull weeds, and i've never felt the need to tell anybody before but right now, i do, and i'm not doing it just so that we can have more traffic and more invasive lights, fewer trees, and ugly plastic turf, and more pollution out there. that's not what i'm doing it for. and so fortunately none of it's

necessary because there's arficial turf for the western sunset playground and natural turf for the beach chalet soccer fields and thanks. >> any additional public comment? ok. so seeing none, the public comment portion of this hearing is closed and we'll move to commissioners questions and comments. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: thank you. i guess there isn't a staff wrap-up. we've probably had quite a bit already. i want to make a few comments. i am a lover of natural turf. one of my joys is working on my lawn. i don't know if it's a joy, spending four hours aireating it in the spring and the fall is not a joy but it is a wonderful thing and the smells and all the things. i really sympathize with those

who want to have natural turf. however, there's a difference between ornamental and recreational uses and among recreational uses, some are more demanding. this is the third time around for the polo fields. i remember when they tried to redo them the first time and threw seed on sand and it didn't take and then they put on turf, they put that down, and did it the right way and it lasted for quite a few years but it's difficult to keep tup and the same is true, i've heard, which is starting to show wear and marina green needs a lot of work, a lot of weeds in there. we have plenty to keep us busy but the challenges of maintaining turf are the hardest as close to the ocean as you get so the most difficult place for natural turf would be the beach chalet fields. we did get an awful lot of

emails on the subject, many from people outside of san francisco. but -- and it was interesting. some of these i would ask by email, you know, how did you find out about the project and i also asked them, do you have artificial turf fields or lights in your jurisdiction, wherever they happen to be writing from, and very few of them replied but a few did and i know they do have these types of things because i grew up in the liberal moore valley and they have lots of fields lit up at night and a number of them are artificial turf so it's interesting, maybe they feel it's not appropriate in golden state park but fine everywhere else and that particular part of the park, everybody has talked about, is a little bit of a scary area. they talk about taking the trees away and a lot of these trees are overgrown foliage which really needs to be cleared out for safety, for the health of the rest of the trees. they did a beautiful job at harding park where they cut some of the trees came down from age

and weather but others were cleared out and they opened it up a lot more and have made the course much better and the same thing at olympic club, which is private, but grass is healthier, the whole area is healthier if it gets light and air so part of that i think is part of what we should be doing, plus the safety factor is chief sir came in to talk about that area where there are obviously the police force knows there's lots of activities that aren't the best that go in in those brambles around there so that's only a side benefit of clearing this up. comments were made about other uses and that the markings will only be for soccer but i think they'll be able to have markings for multiple other sports. they talked about lacrosse. i would think they'd be able to do that. perhaps gaelic football. you can have multiple markings on artificial turf field and they still work. keys has those types of -- i've

seen a lot of them that are artificial turf. ignatius put in artificial turf in their football field five years ago and it's worked out quite well and they have multiple markings. the other thing i thought was unusual, there was a lot of comments about the hazards with artificial turf. however, i never heard too much about problems with it being used everywhere else in the city but it's a problem at beach chalet so it seems like if you're really concerned about the hazards with artificial turf, you would be concerned everyplace else. andy -- and then there was another comment made about golf courses and the maintenance is a lot different for golf courses than it is with soccer fields and some of those need a lot of work, too. and then we talk about the other fields. we have keys, the polo fields, another natural turf fields

within golden gate park that we can devote our resources towards those and allow the kind of play that we're going to need, and having coached kids in grammar school, 5:00 comes pretty early on winter days and to try to -- adults want to use fields, too. they want to be active. they want to participate. and this gives us another tool. someone else commented about the fact that professional sports are going back to natural grass and, yeah, i support that 100%, but they have a dedicated field. they can spend unlimited amounts of money on these fields to keep them in prime condition and it's a lot different if you're trying

to use them all the time. and the e.i.r. itself, there were analysis of four alternatives. they talked about no plan. they talked about lights with natural turf. they talked about artificial turf with no lights and the preferred plan which is the one that's before us. also there was a question about the coastal commission and apparently the project is outside the jurisdiction of the coastal commission so i'm not sure that if you can see the lights from somewhere within the jurisdiction of the coastal commission it does not necessarily mean they have jurisdiction over that but that may be a point that was trying to be made. i've already talked about the trees and i think some of the trees are thinning out to make it a healthier area. and finally, the wildlife situation. there wasn't a lot of wildlife in that area before 1939 when it was all sand, probably, and much of golden gate park was all sand, too. so we actually have created an

environment and there's plenty of places for the scunks and the raccoons and the coyotes and birds and bats to go, except for those nine acres, there's a lot of other park that can be part of their habitat and i think they'll be able to adapt to other parts. i really don't see a problem with this particular e.i.r. there was one other issue brought up, i guess it was about the lights and there are other lights in golden gate park, at keyzar, at the concourse. and i don't think it's foreign to have lighting there and the technology has been improved greatly. you notice the lights at at&t park, which are much larger than these would be, but the light coming off of those is much less than in some of the orland parks, particularly candlestick or other places where the light suggest not as advanced as it is today. you can focus the lights on a fairly discreet area and you'll

still be able to see the night sky a few blocks away from it and see all the things you want to see and there's still lots of land there. two miles between lincoln and slot and another mile between slote and lands end so there's plenty of room to walk and see nature and see the night sky so i don't have a problem with certifying it or approving this. >> commissioner borden? commissioner borden: . >> yeah, i have a lot of similar sentiments as commissioner antonini. i thought it was interesting when staff was laying out at the beginning the issues around the principles and thoughts both in the golden gate park master plan, also looking at the recreation open space plan and general plan. every week we come here with projects and they're often conflicting and competing issues that we have to weigh in making our decisions. there are aspects you can use to

absolutely support either position in this particular case. i think when we look at the general plan, which is the larger -- the guiding document the planning commission lives by, is this really utopian ideal about how we'd like to see san francisco, we'd like to see it be a diverse place where all people can work and play and families and socio-economic diversity and a lot of things we talk about in that document and it's always the measure of how do you balance all of the competing interests and competing issues there. i think one of the things that was really interesting in this project is we often debate the issues around families staying in the city and why they do or don't stay in the city and obviously you can't ever attribute it to one specific thing. there is usually a list of things that makes a decision for people to chose to be somewhere and not be somewhere but at the end of the day, the longer the list grows, the more difficult is becomes and the issues around

soccer fields in san francisco have long been a problem for as long as i can remember, with many friends lamenting taking their kids all around the bay area. people having to acquire cars who didn't own cars, to access soccer fields in other parts of the bay area because of the lack of soccer fields in san francisco that were accessible and available for use. i also wanted to touch on the issue of accessibility because i think the interesting thing about the beach chalet fields is, because of the number of lines of transit, that they are accessible and that's one of the unique things you have about fields in this location. i myself used to live at 48th and lincoln so i know this area and it's interesting because for the longest time i didn't know the soccer field had been there because it's not super noticeable and i would be at the park chalet or in that area and it's only because people walked through with soccer uniforms on that i was aware of the fact the fields were there. so when i look at the project, it is a renovation project.

we've had testimony that it's been soccer fields or athletic fields for over 70 years. when you talk about the natural state, we all know that the natural state was sand dunes, though we're not really preserving a natural state. at best, a natural state would be the current condition which is soccer fields or athletic fields and that's not exactly a peaceful, serene environment because people are walking all over it all the time and playing games in it. i think the park can be a place for everyone. i think we've devised a park with space for people do lots of different things, for people to watch birds, for people to do tai chi, for people to visit museums. i think there can be a space and place for all of us to co-exist in the park. i don't think it has to be one way or another. this project is about seven acres which is less than 1% of the overall park which is over 1,000 acres and it is a renovation project of an existing facility within the

park. if we were talking about taking a new space that had never been athletic fields and making it athletic fields, i think we'd have a different conversation but i think to the extent that we are talking about a renovation of an existing facility, and the challenge that we have, that we don't maintain our open space very well, and someone mentioned golf courses. if you've looked at lincoln park, that golf course is a mess. and a lot of our facilities suffer. there's a controversial ballot measure about clay tower. i think a lot of people feel there's a lot of needs within our recreation and park facilities that we need to deal with and we don't have enough funds or resources to deal with those things and that is a reality and i don't see that's changing in the near future. i, myself, played soccer. i wouldn't prefer to play on turf. i would prefer to play on grass fields. that's what i played on. doesn't seem appealing to me to play on turf but as a former soccer player and as a stepmom

to a soccer player where i spend my weekend at soccer tournaments, when you play soccer, you care about playing. a lot of people would prefer grass fields because it's a great, rich experience but at the same time, if the choice is to play or not to play, you would always choose a turf field because it provides an opportunity and as a person who has watched a lot of games, the games can go on as a consequence and there's passion and lessons in life kids learn through playing sports that can't be underscored enough, not to mention the fact that we're facing an obesity epidemic in this country and we have a lifestyle that's more and more centric around personal devices, taking us away from outdoor recreational activities so anything we can do to encourage young people and adults in the

city and provide facilities for them to recreate, helps us with healthy san francisco and other initiatives in our general plan and priorities we've discussed. in terms of the lights, you know, it gets dark at 5:00 p.m. for a good portion of the year in the wintertime and with the fog and we can debate whether or not the fog makes the lights worse or not, it stands to reason that you need lights to be able to play, to have any respectable amount of playing time. i think we've heard testimony about lots of different types of lighting systems that exist today, there are smarter lighting systems. there are things that can be done to make the lights less -- more environmentally responsible, not on for long periods of time. that's not what we have to decide here today and not the scope of what's ultimately decided by this commission. we've also heard testimony about changes in turf fields and the types of materials being used. so when it comes to the question, the environmental

issue, there are advances made every day. do i have concern about turf fields? absolutely do. the science is not clear and i think it's similar to cell phone antenna technology but unfortunately, the best we can, we have to deal with what we know, take our guess best judgment based on what we know and the other health needs like the obesity epidemic we are facing that is real and tangible that we know is more likely to kill us at this point than probably a turf field. so in looking at those issues, another couple of things that i noticed is that people were talking about the issue of the turf fields but also advocating swapping the turf fields and i think if turf fields are bad in golden gate park, they're bad everywhere else but if there's a toxic issue, we have to be consistent on that. it doesn't make sense to advocate to move it elsewhere if

that is the major problem we've identified. i think that there's a lot of support in the room even among people who said they are not supportive of the turf fields for soccer fields and i think that's great. i think that to the extent that moving forward we can all work together to create more diversity of recreation and open spaces for everyone to enjoy, the better we all can be. maybe we wouldn't have gotten to this point if we all worked together to make sure there was spaces for everyone to be in the park together if we all were pitching in to help take care of the park a little better. i recognize that the city, it's their responsibility, but i think we all have a responsibility to play, as well, there. so it's with that and knowing the shortcomings of turf versus grass that i actually feel like that this is a small thing we can do that can help a great many families, a great many of

people be able to recreate in the city. at the same time, maintaining the overall state of the golden gate park and for the most people will never even know that these field are there unless they visit for a soccer game. >> commissioner wu? vice president wu: thank you. i will try not to repeat comments as it is quite late in the night now. so by my reading of the e.i.r., there is no spillover of the light on to the beach so when standing on the beach, there's no perceptible light. as i understand, the light poles are slated to have caps on them that may make it so that -- i'm no bird expert, but from what i understand, birds fly toward a point of light and that the cap over the light alleviates that point. it's not to say that's not an issue to be concerned about but i think that helps lessen that

problem. i appreciate that the project has changed, that the lights have come off of the edge of the fields and that they've come to the middle and that they've been lowered and that there's -- i think there's two settings, 50 and 30, with candles is the measurement. with regards to the field or the astro turf, like commissioner borden said, it's sort of to be learned at a later date, but i recognize that there was substantial effort put into the task force by department departf environment and department of public health to study it and to really challenge the turf industry to use more recycled materials and recycle the materials after they are taken out of the ground. of by my reading of it is rose,

the recreation and open space element, and also the golden gate master plan. the golden gate master plan seems to call out beach chalet as a soccer field intended for recreation. and so i think a number of -- a few speakers stated that point, and that the r.o.s.e., as commissioners have stated, every document you can flip through and find the pieces of it that helped your argument, but i do think there is a real call for recreation and a real call for equal access for recreation for people throughout the city so i appreciate learning about the different leagues and appreciate that youth and adults from all zip codes are coming to play and i asked a number of questions of rec. park to see if there are scholarships and if there is sort of a turn-no-kid-away

policy at least for -- i think it's the police activities league, so i appreciate that this is a sport that you need a ball and a good field and you can have access. so, again, the call for the need for more hours of play, i think i'll leave it at that for now. >> commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i'm in full support and full appreciation of the definitely identified need for a larger number of playing fields, including playing fields which have surfaces which are compatible or maintain to be compatible with the type of game children seem to prefer and which parents and guidance and coaching shows are safe in preventing injuries. i do, though, agree with a large

number of people who raised very valid comments in response to the e.i.r. and that is basically what is in front of us. i appreciate the commission's uniform support for rec. and park's need for playing fields, finding every strategy by which we not only maintain but increase the specific needs for recreational activities in the city. i do believe that the e.i.r. has serious deficiencies, while formulate and put to record but those people who spoke to it today and by those captured in the previous comments to the draft e.i.r. this is not the time to repeat them. we've been sitting here for almost 12 hours and i'm almost incapable of expressing them better than what has been said. that is the impact of lights, on golden gate park. that is the lack of interpretation and respect for what the golden gate