for 50 years. i want to point out that the eir is defective because it treats the current parking lot of the triangle as if it is a permanent land use. the eir and staff contend that this is the only way. more open space will be provided than the proposed project without losing the historic resources.

this is not necessary to build in a triangle in under to provide additional public space. the triangle purchased to provide an open space part of the park counts as designated open space. this is a huge effect in the eir because all of the project alternatives treat this like it is a parking lot ignoring the open space designation. to make that work, you have got to revise that. >> i am a 55-year resident of

north beach. i live one block from the library. i am here to urge you to reject the eir because its analysis of alternatives is deficient. the overwhelming deficiency is it is contrived treatment of project alternatives. as just explained, the designation of the triangle as open space purchased for open space and park use was not considered when looking at project alternatives at this renders it inadequate. the city may balance their perception of the benefits against impact in deciding whether to approve the proposed project.

the requirements are not that simple. demolition cannot be approved if there is a feasible project alternative that accomplishes most of the project benefits. the alleged alternatives were created to be rejected. none of them considered would avoid a loss of the historic branch library while still meeting fundamental project objectives. however, there is a feasible project alternative that will

meet the project objectives and avoid demolition of the library and the loss of those three magnificent trees. >> think you. -- thank you. >> i am a 32 year resident of the city of san francisco and i do not live in north beach. it is extremely important what happens on this site. i am here to represent the rest of this city. the analysis of alternatives is

defective because it fails to consider a feasible alternative that would meet the fundamental project objectives and avoid the demolition of the library. what you have seen of here shows the existing library to the north. these illustrations were submitted by san francisco karadzic to the planning commission and were attached to the supplemental brief provided you yesterday. this is an obvious solution and the eir is inadequate for failing to consider its

feasibility. written comments requesting consideration received inadequate response. strange objectives relating to the program division and the more level functions are easily solve the design details or unrelated to project objectives. it will level the floors of the existing library and make an elevator to make it accessible. this option would meet the

stated objectives and avoid the significant adverse impact to the resources. as a potentially feasible alternative to demolition, we feel that a -- is a bonafide alternative. this can be made accessible and safe as well as be the most incrementally green option. >> thank you, next speaker. >> i have not figured out how to do this. this is the same drawing as before.

i have lived in north beach for 49 years. this is inadequate and should be revised and it will include new space on the triangle. this is well illustrated. i hope that you can understand this. it was pretty bleary on the back. i have sent most of you seven documents.

this would be consistent with the intent with a park or garden which will celebrate this parcel of land which is one in a series of historic bonds that are created along the diagonal line. i believe it was financed privately which shows what can be done. there's also the trial which has a pond and giant magnolias.

there is a tunnel -- tiny triangle. other cities choose to celebrate not erase their parks. this is enhancing rather than obliterated by merging. >> the sunset casts a beautiful glow on telegraph hill, "tower, st. peter and paul church.

seizing land by eminent domain to buy a private owner who wanted to build a condominium is extreme. as a resident, i fully supported that. i see tourists stopping all the time that this intersections and taking pictures, 360 degrees around. a cable car has taken this route. this action was done using an

american law. when i learned that the city of san francisco considered building a new library, i was appalled. the idea of taking land forcibly from a private owner for the purpose of using it for -- is completely unethical and hypocritical. in speaking with the business owners within two blocks, some of whom are not native english speakers, i found that many have not been informed of the issues at hand and don't understand how the landscape will change.

>> i'm an architectural historian. i urge you to reject this eir it does not discuss the ramifications on what is planned. we are talking about closing mason street but it will not be all and open space. this will be blocked by the building. this decision has already been made once before. george christopher, a wise mayor, made the decision to compromise some of the space on the part because a library does not fit on the triangle. there was a gas station there. i urge you to -- to this

historic choice. the waterfront freeway is not done. the east front will not be pushed forward. he was set aside at that time. he is not a go, go, let's do it. for seven years, the library and was planning on renovating and expanding the north beach branch. until the money came and they had all this extra money to burn, i come from fresno, we were working and can the same for the governor's budget. we don't have money to burn. we don't need to pay off a building twice or three times more expensive. we need to be putting that into books, computers, things for kids in the school. i urge you to reject this plan. they're moving the tennis courts from where they are into the

left out field and it will only be 141 feet and that is nowhere near any recognized ball field. this dishonors joe the maggio. there is no getting around these figures. this is 28% of the building taking that open space. this is only discussed as -- and there is nothing about the view corridor. this is a falsification and really if you look at some of the drawings in that report, they are falsified. this is designed perjury and should be consequences. this looks like this building does not project into the

streets as far as the duds. this is an outrage. this is an outrage that people would present a document with falsified plans not in scale to the public. thank you. >> thank you. i want to reiterate that this is the time for anyone who is opposed to the north beach library plan, or wishes this to be rejected. if anyone who represents the appellants would like to address the board on items other than the eir, you do have another opportunity.

>> this really offered fair alternatives. this is always a dilemma with the incrementally valuations, how do you take a proposed project and then it cannot show the alternatives so that the decision makers can make a proper decision? there are no drawings in the environmental impact report and no proper explanation of a historical preservation of rented. i don't want to sound like a preservationist because i'm not a preservationist but i think that here we can make an addition, we can add the 59% square footage.

we can add the safety requirements, we can at the sensibilities, the new computers, all of those uses. the question is, are we getting the best possible design and do you see that? you have a very handsome existing modern building of the high point of modernism which was functionalism so that you could see the books that you were reading, city could join around the tables and so there would be a cozy atmosphere. the new design, which would take up this open space, this new design is all life and glass. i don't fit into two stores worth of glass and ordered to

read a book. this is very difficult to do. i believe there will be some screens, shade and all of those glass panels. furthermore, this is sort of an aggressive attack on that corner to have this glass building. this is vulnerable. this parking lot is supposed to become a -- setting. you're not getting a fair -- >> next speaker.

>> you had a chance to speak but you will speak on any other item. >> i will speak on this woman's last remarks. she does remarked that there are glass panels in this library that goes all the way around. in fact, there is no glass panels, this is a 30 foot wall. the only glasses on the corners and the doors and the glass across the top. perfect for graffiti. a 30 foot high wall. i want you to look at this building. all things that are equal in parks, but this building on

washington square. this is the exact same vista that will be wiped out. that is why the alternative was better. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> i'm still skeptical. it could be argued that the front and the start building which changed the dynamics.

a park in front of the library would be a game changer. that would definitely make the building for him something that should not be demolished. and the location of the street is part of the issue. the issue of constructing 20 feet onto a street which is shown in black which is extending over the entire sidewalk and into the parking space and it takes not only any significant open space that would be procured for but also very significant use. as several people have mentioned, there has only been three community meetings.

they showed images of a trying your library in different forms which were very appealing. -- of a triangular library in different forms. the power point is available through the website. as i walked through the neighborhood with some of our committee members of the last weekend, around the playground, we were struck with one thing. people intuitively understand and appreciate open space on the triangle and the fact that a cost-effective renovation is creating thousands of square feet of more additional space is a good idea. thank you.

>> good evening. i'm an architect. this is my neighborhood. i like to talk to about a plan that a similar in celebrating the site that is the north beach playground. joe to maggio did learn to play here. not only should be familiar, he should understand that his predecessor voted to vacate this land and he did so because he saw the image and this turned

his mind around. we did not have enough votes to be veto-proof. when he saw the -- in the corner of the trial, and the new library, this is a totally new library. all the way back to the corner of the existing playground, you can see into this site. you can see the ball field. we came in with an addition to the building that was to the east on the playground slide. when you see the preferred alternative, there are three tennis courts. in my plan, and you can have three also. it compromises left-field, so i

would leave this alone and only give you a key courts. the additions to its and of little space where the alternative production -- where the alternative has a sloped surface. we have a fleet accessible link. suddenly, the ship turned. people who wanted it or not there. people who wanted the open space left as a trial or not there. that does not mean the idea is dead. this does not consider the reason that we have been doing this in the first place. they put our comments in but the

responses are weak. patients studied these open triangle schemes in an eir that makes sense. >> i hope that everyone realizes this is the first public meeting. in any case, my belief is that closing mason street.

this is referred to and there is an interesting footnote on page 65 of the dier. it was not consistent with the other studies. i will give you that. proposed to close in mason street at this time or in the very near future. >> i think one of the problems here -- >> you already did speak

during public comment. we are allowing appellants that have spoken to speak again on other issues other than the eir. >> can i speak on another item? >> you already had the opportunity to speak. >> i am here regarding the closure of mason street.