documents have been issued. so, we wonder what was the public able to review and what documents was the planning department able to review at the time? if there were any environmental analysis, it happened after public notice. additionally, a new review of emissions generated by the proposed mechanical systems for the next year construction has been done because the air quality screening analysis states that no exterior changes are proposed. this air quality report was based on plans that are now outdated. the school applied for an exemption from environmental review which is not subject to neighbor notification or public comment. the only plants are a set of drawings dated july 8th, 2011. these to not indicate any

proposed changes to the roof and show the mechanical systems on the first floor. the planning department granted an exemption from environmental review. the document describes the roof deck and an elevator penthouse that is not mention mechanical systems or an outdoor roof impact. the public was not notified of this decision because it is not required. and no significant environmental analysis with public review has been done to reflect the current plans for the roof. neither the lab or the mechanical systems are mentioned in the document. we feel that in advance of any

conditional use authorization decision that cdc should be compelled to have a full impact review. thank you. >> hello, my name is peter good. i live directly across from 601 delores. this is considered a historically significant buildings. it is a beautiful landmark in the neighborhood and we are glad that it will have a new use. as part of the environmental exemption review process, a historical evaluation was required. the consultants and completed

their final evaluation in 2011. the stair elevator penthouse will not be visible from the public street. this is inaccurate. the changes to the roof are so significant that they will be viewable from the park and beyond, as well as being visible to neighbors. additionally, the historic response from the city's preservation office states in part two that the response is based on plans submitted on july 8th, 2011. they show no changes to the building. the response is based on outdated and inaccurate plans. the senior preservation planner signed the document in march. the preservation department

should be compelled to complete a new historical review based on current and accurate plans. we feel that they should be required to return to the july, 2011 plans, that they submitted. mainly, moving the mechanical systems back to the first floor where they were when they applied for the environmental evaluation an example -- exemption. no structures should be put on the roof and in no roof deck should be built. thank you. >> neighbors are concerned about be parking plan. on 19th street, they plan to remove several parking spaces,

including a handicapped space. the school would have a loading zone at 85 feet. it should be 50 feet in length. it is claimed that only fifth graders will be dropped off in the mornings. although they say that they will have a crossing guard and staff to monitor this, we feel that the traffic congestion will still be increased and caused significant impact. we also have concern about car exhaust fumes 6028 graders are supposed to walk or bike -- the line we also have concern about car exhaust. 6 to 8 graders are supposed to walk or bike. we do not feel that cdc as

realistically strutted this. they did not look at afternoon impact. the intersection is already dangerous at almost any hour. there is no stop sign at dolores street. for years, the mta has denied the request for stop signs or traffic signals at this busy intersection. the presence of a school adds new urgency to this request. any increase in traffic or to- drink ingestion for the congestion at this intersection should be carefully scrutinized by city agencies. this is a dense and pocket the

neighborhood and we oppose the loss of any parking spaces. planning and the mta should recommend where a new handicapped parking space can be placed in the immediate area to replace the one that was moved. we feel that the planning commission should not make a ruling on this request until a full and accurate traffic study has been completed. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. i am here to talk about the lack of transparency in consideration that the neighbors have demonstrated. the school has a great reputation and claims to be a great neighbor.

i am a neighbor and all of us tonight who were here talking about this, they have not made any outreach to us at all. they are asking you to come into my backyard and turn what is currently a single-family home into an outdoor classroom and mechanical storage area. they have not talked to me about that. they have sought to minimize and they ignore the formal input. they had a few feel good social events to which many neighbors were not invited or notified. i never heard of these meetings. furthermore, only partial plans were ever visible for those neighbors that were fortunate to know someone to get invited or able to review. only this past monday, after a neighbor literally went out and let us know about this meeting

did we provide some feedback to the school. they did not pay as any mind. at the meeting, we asked them to continue into considered the one-month continuous- continuation said that they could meet with the neighbors. this would have been a gesture of good faith. we only receive notice and the opposite plan to continue and we hear tonight. as we have described, there has been a pattern of incomplete plants and getting incomplete information. as mentioned, in july, the drives that were submitted to planning to not include elevation of dryness. those that actually show the height in the three-d perspective or the things that were omitted by cb -- cds to

you. they're asking for the notification requirements and based on their lack of transparency and lack of to medication, we are very concerned that should it be granted, we have no faith that this will continue to make any at reached to the plans. >> this is the former church. this is about 10 feet from my home. i heard many this is a concrete

slab. we are fine with this, this is the way that it is. i would like to talk about the planning department. the people of san francisco rely on our planning department to guard against projects that negatively impact neighborhoods and residences or that altered buildings of historical significance. we hold the planning department responsible for ensuring that these projects follow the review to the letter and played by all of the rules. unfortunately, we believe that they hoped that the public would not notice their plan and that the bureaucracy and the planning codes that are complex and opaque would provide a clear and accurate understanding of the plan. we understand their plan and we understand the negative impact they would have on our homes, our neighborhood, our home businesses, and are generous

welfare. if they want to be a great neighbor, then they should revise their plans to sister the address our concerns. our request are reasonable. we ask that you did not make a decision today regarding this conditional use authorization request. we asked for this denial of because the new structure, mechanical systems clearly intensified the use of the building when compared to plans from july, 2011. we feel that the schools should return to those original plans. those plans are acceptable to us as they had no ext. three changes. if they insist on the changes come to a full environmental review, historical review should be submitted. those documents should be open to a neighbor notification and public comment.

we ask that the planning commission carefully considers the many neighborhood concerns in this matter. thank you. >> thank you, commissioners. i am speaking on behalf of myself and the five adults in our buildings and neighborhoods that were not able to make it. i am really amazed how many people were able to come out on such short notice. we literally did not know about his plans. they celebrate diversity,

promote justice and respect for all people, and aspire always to act with these -- i would encourage them to live up to their values in dealing with the neighborhood. this is our block. along here is dolores street, 19th street.

we love it because it is residential. for a different perspective, this is a view from the deck. that is the equivalent over six

vehicles backed up on that roof. this is a tar paper roof. that would not make any sense. just for comparison, just try to combine the two. the view from the street, we talked earlier about dangerous traffic conditions.

>> we have seen many positive changes in the neighborhood. my issue concerns congestion and safety. regarding congestion, understand that they have to have loading and unloading its own. i suggest the lower st. is a better solution. other trafford could much more easily it pass the loading zone -- other trafford could more easily pass the loading zone.

dangerous behavior by children running into the street can be avoided but does happen sometimes. get around 8:00 a.m. in the morning, people need to leave by car, and the street is already very croed. although they say they will monitor, it is difficult to control behavior sometimes, and i think with 25 cars coming in the morning, you would have a real firestorm, so we would be looking at more traffic, and i want to give kudos for not having a drop off at the end of today, but only at the beginning, because i think that we would be able to return more spots to the streets. there is an extremely dangerous intersection. i walk my dog there every morning. we have to be careful about

cars, and with children at the school, we need a stop sign or a traffic light so we will have a better flow of traffic and other -- and a better neighborhood. we have to have the handicapped spot currently at the corner. we have to go around a spot in a handicapped spot to get to the zone. that would be a perfect storm for congestion. it is a mess. in conclusion, there are many concerns and we ask you to consider, and i thank you for my opportunity to speak tonight.

>> i am at the top floor condominium at 19th street. we have lived in this condominium for six years. we are concerned about the relocation of the heating system in the basement. we do not see this as a necessary change but rather a desired change on the part of cds. this relocation is a partial reason for the wall to impact the boilers. the location is between

approximately 4 feet to 6 feet away from our bedroom. the addition of the screen wall will not only block significant light. the previous owner set it in the basement without making exterior changes. this is where it did say. while we understand the desire to offer a certain amount of classrooms to a certain amount of children, we strongly believe small amount of square footage should be shaved off each room to allow the boilers to remain in the basement. alternatively, although we were grateful, and we were concerned

about utilizing the space for a lounge, freeing up additional space to relocate the boilers. it is detrimental to the health, safety, of this neighborhood and is residents. thank you for your time. sandra and i support the concept of rooftop gardens in public spaces and the ability for kids to interact with nature. we are opposed to the rooftop garden of dislocation for two reasons. one is it requires a new elevator, added height.

it will emit noise. this disturbs an otherwise quiet residential setting. we understand the school has a small farm of 16th street, and the students will go to another location for a gym class. we question why can the students go to 16th street for their nature classes a swell -- as well? the sidewalks are begging for greenery. the schools should be required to install raised tens with a pro. planting for children to take care of in an outdoor setting.

these planters are promoted throughout the city. there are so many unresolved issues that continuance is a good idea. we are voicing many concerns. we want you to listen to us. the full set of plans was not disclosed. they were on board of that point. these changes need to be addressed on the exterior, and we thank you for your time and patience as we walk you through these issues. >> i lived at 49 cumberland

st., and i do not have a kid at the school, but i want to talk in favor of the school. i think the environmental upside of the rooftop garden, it is a great thing for our neighborhood. great things have been happening with the new part, with cleaning its to up, and jua lot of positive things. there are not too many places to put a garden, and it seems like a good thing for the kids going to school and the positive thing for the neighborhood.

today in the afternoon there was a drum corps making noise. 22 kids, my understanding, and i have been to a couple of meetings at school, is that these kids will be in class, not having a marching band. i feel like it is blown out of proportion in that we do live in ++

and proportionately, i do not think there is a significant impact, and i am hoping, i am taking them up their words that if there is going to be a late night graves to raise money for the city or something -- late night rave to raise money for the city or something that they will invite us. i know that is light-hearted, but i am very much pro the school, and i think the negative things that have been brought up are outweighed by the positive things this spring to our community. -- this brings to our community. there was bad stuff that happened, and it is great to get someone in there. it stayed vacant. the school can afford $6 million. it seems to me we are not going to get a better soon to the community. >> i am also a neighbor.

i live with my wife and daughter, which is another noise conversation we can have. i am also very much in favor of this project. i think the school is going to be incredibly beneficial to this neighborhood, along with the program in dolores park, it has become increasingly important. in my interaction with the folks at the school, they have been nothing but honest and up front and willing to work on any issues. the reputation and the community is unparalleled. i think this is a great thing for our community. and thank you very much.

>> i have lived at 375 20th street for 13 years. my children were very excited about having this change in the neighborhood. the neighborhood has been increasingly supportive of families, which are really appreciate. i want to speak to some of the parking concerns, because i do not have rosh, and i am very familiar with the patterns in the neighborhood, and the worst time for parking is weekends and evenings, and that is the inverse of when people would be