think whether we would like to would not -- or not have to advise -- acknowledge others for their roles because the city saw taking the concerns of city health meant over what it will look like. and oakland really de demonstrated what that would mean. i think what happened in terms of public safety in oakland the previous night show that was not worth it, the that was not passed san francisco should take. i think the meetings will be fruitful. i think this resolution is important in terms of the board of supervisors. i am taking a stance of protecting first amendment. it is one of the most valuable rights we have in this country, and we should always do what we can to support that. really quickly, last week i met a dpw worker who retired last february, and he was in one of

the homeless centers and did not have a bit for that night. it shows many of the city workers live in the balance that many of us in the 99% are in. there are things he has, but we often live in the balance of being able to make our rent payments every month, and we support our city workers who do this work every day, and when they retire, i'm not sure there will have a roof over their heads. everyone in the city is very cognizant of that. we need to work towards a solution. a solution exists. i know we can do it, and i am glad everyone is at the table to make that happen. i think one of the public, enters had ventur commenters hae task force. we will be coming out that the next few weeks. thank you again to the co- sponsors and supervisor avalos for bringing this forward. i look forward to voting on this tomorrow.

i would like to move this forward with positive recommendation. supervisor avalos: thank you, supervisor kim. i know you were at occupy oakland of the weekend as well. and i want to thank the members of the public for being here. i want to thank you for your comments. we did not hear one, and against this resolution. i also want to thank you for being part of this movement. for someone who is in a labor organizer, fighting against poverty and economic justice, i am really excited about the consciousness that is being raised across the country in the examples of a here in the bay area and the bravery it takes to stand up for that consciousness as well. as an elected official, i believe i need to he did call. that is what this resolution is

about. -- i believe i need to heed the call. i have a member of the whole but i just read into the record, and we will take that without objection. ok pier aga. a motion to move it forward to tomorrow's board meeting. we will do that without objection. madam clerk, the we have any other items before us? >> no, mr. chairman. supervisor avalos: we are adjourned. [applause]

>> let me start over. [roll call] president olague is absented.

the first item on calendar is items proposed for continuance. item four, case to that and 11.0949d -- case 2,011.0949d. commissioners, with that, i am not aware of any other item on

your calendar being proposed for continuance. commissioner miguel: is their public comment on the items proposed for continuance? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner moore: move to continue items one through four as read into the record. >> thank you. on the motion to continue items one through four as proposed, -- commissioner antonini: aye. those items are continued as proposed. the next item is -- you are now at your consent calendar. item 5 constitutes the consent calendar today. consider to be routine and will be acted upon by a single call -- single roll call vote of the commission appear there will be no separate discussion unless you or a member of the public was-so requests. in that event, the matter would be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a

separate item at this or a future hearing. it is a zoning map amendment. commissioner miguel: is there any public comment on the item on the consent calendar? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner borden: i move to approve the item on consent. >> on the motion for approval of item 5 -- commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. the item has been approved. europe commissioners questions and matters. commissioner moore: -- >> you

are now at commissioners questions and matters. commissioner moore: ideas were presented. some provided answers, and as always, there was a huge group of new questions. very insightful first set of questions came from the bay trail, describing at least eight very specific projects which would be advantageous to be accomplished. at some point, perhaps we can get a presentation. very positive response by everybody who heard it. along fisherman's wharf in the jefferson street area, which makes so much sense. i think there will be a major push to understand how that really can help the city as a direct benefit from the america's cup.

i will report on the other details as they come up. there was solid discussion, and i am positive that the right people are sitting at the table. commissioner antonini: often, we discuss ways, the subject of one of our items last week was to foster greater public participation or planning issues, and i think that is a great topic. we are not alone in disappointing public participation. the election on tuesday, i think if we are lucky, we might get up to a 40% turnout, which i think is really not good, and i do not know what the reason is, but being a student of history to some degree, i think in 1975, we had a turnout for a mayor's race with an open seat.

beth -- i am not really sure why so people vote, but it is an area of concern. commissioner miguel: i wanted to take the opportunity -- although the results are not official, they seemingly are final -- to congratulate the winners in the san francisco election held this week and also to say thank you because my mail box can become unstuffed and my phone can stop ringing. >> thank you, commissioners. we can move on to directors report, directors announcements and review of past week's events at the board of supervisors, board of appeals, and historic preservation commission. >> thank you.

just three announcements today. i wanted to announce, and i think you have a flier on this, the workshop and the chinatown street design project that is happening november 16 from 4:00 to 5:30 next wednesday. there has been a series of workshops on the effort on broadway. separately, i think you know, tomorrow is a holiday in honor of veterans day, so the office will be closed tomorrow, as are most city agencies. third, i will be out of the office, as i think i mentioned earlier, in new york for the zoning conference in mentioned happening in new york city. i will be out, and kelly will be in charge of the department. there was no board of appeals hearing this week. that is it for me unless there are questions. >> commissions, there was also no historic preservation commission hearing. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. planning department staff here to give you your weekly update on board of supervisors activities. the land use committee heard a resolution titled rental options for the property at 2121 third street. this is an option in the eastern neighborhoods plan. this was the first time the land use committee has heard a development agreement that would allow on-site rental housing and set of payments into the inclusion rehousing fee. it was absent -- after a resolution authorizing the director to execute the agreement. the proposed project has already been approved by this commission but needed board action on the final agreement. this agreement will commit the project sponsor to providing affordable rental housing on site. typically, the affordable housing requirement for this area would be a fee equal to the cost of 20% of the unit. in this case, the agreement will allow a reduction to 17%

inclusion very requirement and a $1 fee for gross square foot waiver of the eastern neighborhoods public benefit fee in exchange for the 30-year commitment to affordable rental housing at this location. after a short hearing, the committee recommended approval of the resolution to the full board. on tuesday as the full board, we had a couple ordinances, which i told you a little bit about. they passed on final reading. the first was the ordinance and ending the alcoholic beverages controls for bowling alleys in the mission, special use of district, and this will be amended to allow sale of beer and wine at a single screen movie theaters, whether they are for profit or nonprofit. that passed on final reading. also, the ordinance titled acts of god or other calamities. you recommended approval of this on july 14. the ordinance was amended per your recommended modifications and this week, it passed on

final reading. there were a couple of new ordinances introduced this week. they amend both the planning code and the zoning map to create the chinatown transit station special use district. these ordinances would permit inhalation of a mixed use building in the chinatown naval of the chinatown station for the central subway. these ordinances will be brought before you in january. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioners, we can now move on to general public comment. this category has a 15-minute time limit, and members of the public may address you on items of interest to the public that fall within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission with the exception of agenda items.

agenda items may address -- may be addressed only at the time they are briefed on the calendar. each member of the public may address you for up to three minutes each, keeping in mind that the entire category has a 15-minute time limit. commissioner miguel: thank you. [reading names] >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am hear from the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. the draft environmental impact report for the beach shall athletic fields have been released. project removes over 7 acres of natural grass and replaces it with over 7 acres of artificial turf and 10 banks of 60-foot lights 150,000 watts. this project will be lighted every night of the year until 10:00 p.m.

it is located in the western end of golden gate park, an area designated by both the national register and the golden gate park master plan as wild and forested. the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods has respectfully requested that the planning commission extend the public comment time for this project for 90 days. the report has been released very recently. this is during the holiday -- the height of the holiday season. we have already had a few holidays, and people will be out of town, have family visiting, things like that. the report is quite dense. there is a lot of technical information, and we would like the opportunity for our members who are not all experts and need to really plow through this to have the time to go through the report to digest it, and to submit comments so they can have informed comments that we feel will help the process. therefore, the coalition is requesting the 90-day extension. thank you very much. commissioner miguel: thank you.

if i have called your name, just come up. any order. >> hello. my name is britain crawford, and i would like to say that i approve of the community plan and think it will have a positive impact on the community -- commissioner miguel: glen park is on the agenda. >> yes, it is on the agenda. commissioner miguel: you speak when that item is called. these are, as for items not on the agenda. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am revisiting an issue i

raised last thursday. our request for reinstatement of the art deco rather than the modern big box design on the proposed cvs store -- i wanted to give you a status on this. commissioner antonini met with us, reviewed both plants, and he agrees that the original design is far superior, much more in character with our neighborhood. commissioner antonini and our neighborhood architect contacted the planner, who says he cannot do anything until he is directed to do so by his boss. calls to kelly by commissioner antonini and by our architect starting yesterday morning have not been answered. the process appears to be stalled, and we ask you to request kelly to get it started again. what we are finally asking is that the department and by the architect and representative to meet with our architect and

representatives to discuss the exterior non-structural design changes that we are requesting. these changes involve putting back the art deco elements characteristic of our neighborhood, such as porthole windows. making such changes should be achievable very quickly and without coming back to the commission again. we feel that excluding them from this process when we helped develop the original design and the previous commission two years ago adopted it was a slap in our face to our organization and our neighborhood. we ask you to help with a relatively simple process by which we can avoid a highly inappropriate design at one of our main portholes, avoid a potential appeal, and preserve the spirit of cooperation that for years has existed between the park and the department commission. thank you.

commissioner miguel: thank you. [reading names] >> before we go forward, if i could make an announcement -- generally, when we had certification, we have a special category for public comment on items that have been close. that is not on this calendar. because it is not, i would recommend that you go through your general public, the category and we open a public comment category for comments on this certification items. that would be for items 10 and 12. but i would recommend that you complete this public comment category without those, and then we open another public comment category to allow comments on this two items. >> so i will be back. >> thank you.

>> linda chapman from nabi hill. i wanted to continue a subject i have mentioned before, which was concerned about the members of my community being pre-empted. they are considering being pre- empted by someone who will say they represent neighbors or this mysterious entity which calls itself from time to time the navajo coalition. i came in here for 1645 pacific, and i saw quite a few residents in the area who were concerned. then, i saw an assertion that david chiu , the supervisor, and the neighbors had made an agreement, and here it is, and this is your marching order. i do not think -- i think the first of all, if something like that is happening, maybe you should consider consulting the

attorney because the board of supervisors has a role where the appeal, not in the process of making the conditions in the first place. then, i saw something rather similar, without maybe the signed agreement in which i heard that lower pulp neighbors and middle hold neighbors supporting use of affordable housing. that did not happen, and i saw quite a few people who saw your notices and believed that the notices meant that they could come down and speak to you who actually lived in the area appeared somebody who lives blocks away will say they are speaking on behalf of the community, but they are not speaking on behalf of that community, as those people told you. i am going to read from the minutes. it said the neighbors decided to postpone a vote until middle" neighbors has heard about it. then, it would say the

development was agreed to conditions requested, and the conditions were not stated at this meeting. was there a committee meeting, a board meeting? there was not. there are no committee meetings because nobody is interested in land use. i am really concerned about the nob hill coalition, as they call themselves. people who hired alice barkley. they do not have meetings or memberships. they have nothing. they negotiated -- took advantage of the zoning administrator, the supervisors, and everyone else, to negotiate conditions based on nothing. while there were notifying the whole community that they were opposing. they were sending out e-mails, and we oppose the project.

3000 supporters who are going to ratify what we said. you will receive some conditions proposed by the novel association based on historic use -- [buildings -- [bell rings] commissioner miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon. representing carpenters local. just some information, i welcome some projects i would like to share with you. one that has been sitting there for quite some time, finally crescent heights project on 10th and market street. i forgot how many units it was until i ask again, it was 754.

i thought might years were going bad. that is fantastic. finally, it is getting going. just this morning, i was told december 1, it was a long way to market street. 1844 market street and octavia. that is where the crane has been sitting there forever. that is another one going, 132 units. things are starting to perk up for the city. with that, i thank you. i thank you for your support and for your heavy and friendly discussions we have had on all these projects. thank you. have a good day. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> yes, just to follow up on this. i think also, 14th near the armory, there are two projects going up at this very moment. i think we had a hand in

approving this commission. commissioner miguel: is there anyone else who wishes to speak during general public, on non- agenda items? if not, regular public comment is closed. >> the commission is opening another public comment category on items that have been heard prior by the commission, and the public hearing has been close. for this calendar, the two items on a calendar that will fall under this category would be items 10, which would bthe certification of the final environmental impact report for 151 to read, and 975 folsom streets, and item 12, which would be -- let me turn the page -- which would be the glen park community plans ratification of the final environmental impact

report. i have two speaker cards for this category. if anyone else would like to speak on either of those items, please fill out a speaker card. commissioner miguel: [reading names] >> hello. i am here to represent the owner of the emerson flag building that adjoins the expansion. our family has owned the building for over 60 years, since 1950, one year before i was born. clearly, it is very old. it is the headquarters of our small family business. clearly, we value the building very highly.

we are delighted to have them as our next-door neighbor. our family was among the original contributors to the building of the museum. we are proud to have our family name engraved on the donor's well, and we have maintained ongoing ownership in the museum. at the same time, we want to insure our rights. while representatives of the project have verbally assured us of many of these rights, we would like them to be formally recognized in writing. in particular that the door directly facing hunt st., the second floor fire escape, the comparable windows, and our well-known emerson flag sign will be preserved. additionally, we would like to maintain our access to the public space adjacent to our building in the event that the museum promenade takes place. we thank you for supporting

neighborly relations. thank you. >> hello. we have a longer formal letter we wanted to give you as well, and i will just read the conclusion from that. the language of the eir appears to preserve the property rights currently enjoyed by our property. like the record to include our concern here as is acknowledged in the draft, the historic nature continue to the aesthetic quality of the expansion site. we would like the planning commission and the board of supervisors to insure that the expansion project respects all the property rights and privileges. the only thing i would like to add to that is a reiteration of