>> 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. this as a structure people can study into research. closing mason street will do mason street is used as a thoroughfare to get passengers from union square to knoxville -- nob hill. if you close the part of mason st., they have to circle back

around, and that adds more money and more time to the fair and also puts more traffic and necessary in that north beach area, and drivers take powell street, then you have a problem, because that is at the main edge of chinatown, and trying to get through there is a headache. you drive all the way from union square to fisherman's wharf, you try that. tell me if mason street is not the most efficient, safest, and most productive way to get tourists and visitors to the city who are staying at the hotel and who we would pick up in the area, visiting from out of town or coming from the up side area, and get over to the fisherman's wharf area, so it is

going to create a problem and create traffic unnecessarily in the area, and i appreciate you also look at that when you want to improve taxi service. well, you yourselves by closing mason street is going to hurt taxi service. >> excuse me, sir, i believe you already had an opportunity to speak. president chiu: sir, you had an opportunity to comment on either the eir or the other. the reason we allow them to speak is specifically the city -- >> if you cut me off, you are cutting off -- president chiu: the city

attorney has devised us that they could, and again during the public comment period of the other hearing items, but all the other members of the public, you had your opportunity to speak. thank you, sir. thank you, sir. are there any other members of the public who would like to speak to are opposed to the north beach library, who want to reject the eir, or who are opposed to any of the other items? if not, why do we not hear from the planning department on the presentation? >> good afternoon, president chiu: , supervisors. the department has received numerous letters, phone calls, and emails in support of and in

opposition to the proposed project. we have also confirmed with the clerk of the board that no supplemental materials from the appellants have been submitted after the appeal deadline. comments received were addressed in the comments and responses on the draft eir. the issues raised by the appellant deal with land use and resources and the range of alternatives studied in the eir. all of these issues have been adequately addressed in the final eir. in terms of land use, the final eir accurately reflects the condition of the project's site at the time the department commenced in burma to review, which is consistent with ceqa requirements. 701 lombard, where the library plans to blame it -- build a new branch. moreover, it is not clear how the showing of the previous

board meetings addresses this with respect to the eir. the eir eliminates the impacts with the association -- with the closing of the parking and a new library at 701 lombard street. a reorganization and improvement of playground features. the eir also includes six studies, north and south of the library, to evaluate impacts using the mason street corridor it, and in addition, it includes simulations show in the library and views from surrounding places. with regard to historic resources, the appellate states that the eir lacks a about a mission of the cumulative impact. the eir includes an extensive analysis of the project and

cumulative impacts and finds the north beach library eligible for listing on the california registry of historic listings. the eir indicates that the master plan demolition of the existing branch will result in a significant and avoidable environmental impact. it also finds that the north beach branch and four others, including -- could make a potential multiple property listing or a contiguous historic district. the eir views the impact associated with demolition of the branch. because the eir indicates adverse impacts with resources, it is required to and evaluate. the final eir includes an analysis of 10 alternatives. a thorough and detailed level of

analysis and more details. the final eir illustrates that six of the 10 would avoid the massive index and would be compatible with the master plan objectives. i would also like to clarify, contrary to testimony, the eir does evaluate alternatives to avoid the impacts, and specifically, the seven expansion alternative -- in meets most of the project sponsors objectives and deals with the open space on the 701 lombard street parcel. this is shown on a page of the eir. further, we believe that the comments and responses is related to the historic resources and all of the other issues. after review, the appellant has not raised any issues that have

not already been addressed in the eir, nor have we heard anything that alters our conclusions with respect to the eir findings. staff respectfully requests that the board of polled this and deny the repeal. this concludes my presentation, and i am available here with my staff members if you have any questions. president chiu: colleagues, any questions? supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: i have a question for the city attorney. we rejected a landmarking of a library, but decide that fact, some people look to pursue the national register, despite a

stated objections from the mayor and the president of the board of supervisors to represents the district, and the state preservation commission did vote it forward, that nomination to the national park service, and can you explain what that means for this appeal? i know that the eir very explicitly stated that this was eligible for inclusion on the national register, but now that it has been nominated, the impact on our analysis today. >> john from the city attorney's office. through the president. the fact that the state historic preservation commission has initiated a process misting this building on the national register does not affect in any way the eir, analysis before you. we took a conservative approach

to their and assumed that the building was a historic resources. we also assumed it was part of a potential listing of other buildings, and we analyze that very thoroughly in this environment impact report. the fact that another state body is pursuing this action is really irrelevant at this point to the eir analysis. i believe we and knowledge that in our appeal response that is before you today, and that process in some ways is just beginning. they have to go through many more steps before anything might happen at the federal level. president chiu: colleagues, any other follow-up questions for planning? typically, at this phase, we would hear from the project sponsor. we have already heard initial presentationom