board of the glen park association as the parks and recreation share. i have been very involved in this process. i can also talk about the coolness of the recreation center in the wintertime. not having installation myself. although technically -- i cannot speak for those who are not in this room today, for the first phase of this park improvement plan, there is a great deal of involvement, with a great deal of feedback during all of the planning workshops that began in december of 2010. i intended all -- attended all but one or two meetings. there are great majority of supporters in the glen park neighborhood. many people use and enjoy this

park on a regular basis. i can say that from being part of this process, we're all excited about the future of this contract because we can build this construction. i thank you for your time with this, and i am looking forward to moving forward with this. >> thank you. >> good morning, commissioners. jennifer with the trust for public land. i am happy to be here today to support this project. usually the trust gets involved with projects -- we like to implement this and we know what plans the said on the shelf. this is such a special place and such a unique opportunity that we thought investing in a master

plan, that looked at the whole canyon and the active recreation area would really serve the department and the community, well over time. we have a grand from the state that was excited to bond implementation dollars on the end, as well as some other private donations. we realize our involvement will allow for an extensive committee process and also, bonds dollars that could go into the ground. we're happy to see that we are getting to this place. but now we're looking at finding additional money to fund the additional faces, -- phases, with the trust for public land continuing to look for the funds

for the other aspects of the plan that were not the top priority of the community. thank you very much for the opportunity to work on this project with this community. >> thank you. >> sali rauf? -- sally roth? >> i am on the board of the glen park association and i would like to request that you bring forward and approved a pending contract. the clubhouse is old, and so is just about everything around. things like the restrooms are so far from being compliant with 88, this is almost remarkable.

the area is heavily used. there are three camps bring their people in to use this area. and we have a cycling through of the area of baseball players and baseball tournament that want to use the field. and if this plan is carried forth, as it is, we will have some technical areas on one side, and we will also have something better done with the area in the back of the clubhouse. this is not very useful for children, for playing at all. one of the things that is important to get out of this thing is that -- the additional safety from upgrading things,

things that are not accessible or approved, and -- it is amazing to me that sometimes institutions are reluctant to make changes because changes are difficult. people fear changes more than they fear death. but changes are what we need to keep this area safe. we need to have a lot of these things fixed. why have someone fall down the stairs, trying to use the restroom in glen park? we need restrooms accessible from the outside, and really bring this place up to speed, make the playgrounds safer and the just a wonderful place for

all of the people of san francisco. thank you very much. >> anistasia and doland. >> good afternoon. the last thing i heard about this project -- i don't understand why there are not hazardous trees that are not in the way of this. it seems that parks and recreation is going to -- is hellbent on the trees. you cut down 100 years trees and put in a sapling. it takes 100 years to replace what never was there. i urge you to modify this contract, or otherwise it has to stop. to remove everything that is

hazardous and the trees that are in the way of projects. looking at all of these pictures, he moved from 100-500 trees. the transparency is missing. he must be rolling around in his grave. this should be totally forbidden to cut healthy trees in this city. we need to have more trees, we don't need the have less trees, and the money would be wasted on this criminal action. this is for a recreation center that badly needs improvement. take care of the playground and do something in mclaren park.

i don't understand how this can even be considered and why those trees are included in this contract. if they need money to cut the trees, just remove them. this is unacceptable to have this done. to our city. the next process is going to continue, with 120 trees removed. and they currently use a herbicide. this should be illegal. and the money should go to improvements and other situations. thank you. >> thank you. >> dolan?

>> good day, laides adies and gentlemen. i have been a 30-year planter of growing and planting trees, not all kinds by just particular ones. i am rather familiar with trees and i really approved of the project as it stands, almost. i do have a serious objection to -- this, there are nine, beautiful, and exotic, and a strange sense of the word -- eucalyptus trees. in other parts of the park. these trees are twice the size of this podium in diameter. these are quite sturdy.

in the original presentation. there was a tree that fell, but this was not a eucalyptus. this was another disease to monterey cypress. there are several in the process of being removed. something fell on the tennis court. the battle of one of the trees it did fall into the net, the side of the tennis court. this is not an excuse for removal of nine sturdy historic trees. simply to move the tennis court. i made some measurements the other day.

i realized that there is a very ugly entranceway -- the movement of the tennis court overturned that area, to the edge of the trees would be so simple. it would be so much cheaper, and would not require any huge amount of money, then it would to remove how many thousands of dollars -- how much does it take to put the bulldozer on the streets, to break out the roof structure of nine big trees. this is just impossible. we don't have that kind of money. i would ask for your approval of the project, but take out the removal of the trees and simply move the tennis courts. >> thank you. >> and is there any other public comment?

>> i am jillian gilette, iwas there for the previous item. transbay center, district plan. thank you for your patience on that. i am here and in my previous capacity as the legislative aide and i have the pleasure of working on this project. i attended 10 or so of the dozen public meetings, and we used our newsletter to help drive further attendance to the meeting, and we would mention in all the other meetings, it is important to remember that this is not just an important neighborhood park, this is a regional park. there are no parks in my neighborhood. we're very much looking forward

to this project. but i used my transportation expertise to help bring them to the table on this project to make certain that we could begin to address some of the problems of the access issues to glen canyon. this is against some very busy streets, and it is one of my personal goals that have access to have the parts improve wherever we can to get these agencies working together. i believe access to our parks should be gracious. supervisor weiner ask me to read into the record this -- i want to convey my support for the glen canyon park improvement project which includes the new expanded playground and the new entrants and new landscaping,

this is a well-loved part about only for the district residents but the city as a whole. the process through which my office participated. the community is eager to see these improvements happen. i encourage you to move forward with this project. >> and is there any other public comment on this item. >> i am frank trisca. the ultimate outcome of the project was based on a very intensive community process. i was involved in 10 of the meetings. i think we came up a little short on the closure. the understanding was that there would be two kinds of trees removed, those that were

hazardous and those that were required for removal. this amounts to 11 trees, and there is a list of the trees to be removed. this comes out to about 42. the highlight of the process was the trip when we walked around the field, and the staff talked about where the trees -- or the trails would be. what i would have liked to see, and perhaps it is not too late, is to have another community field trip and we can say, this tree has to be removed for this reason. and just go from tree to tree with everyone that will be cut. not everyone will agree but at least we can understand what is going on. right now there is a lot of confusion. i like this project but we need some more closures to the tree removal. [applause]

>> i am and a resident of the glen park area. my wife and i moved there because it was undeveloped that we wanted to walk our dog in that area. unlike the very well-developed other parks. i have not been a part of these meetings all along and i wonder if i am typical of a lot of people in this area. the glen park association, i wonder if the people who show up at this meetings are more biased to construction. the people i talk to do not want us. they want to keep this area as the last undeveloped park in the city. no one is objecting to the ada

bathrooms, but i want you to think about the long-term effects of cutting down at 100- year-old tree. the rumors that i hear are about the fire roads being paved over, and the writ -- the creeks will be diverted. this is more of the entrance area, but i would ask you to keep in mind that the association's that may be speaking here do not necessarily represent everyone in the community. i intend to go into more of these meetings going forward. >> and is there any other public comment on this item? public comment is closed. what's the matter is in front of the commission. commissioner lowe: i was wondering if the department could come back and talk about

the tree removal, and the net addition of trees? >> i would be happy to address this. we have very specific numbers on this, we have presented this and i will repeat this here. for this particular project there have been 60 hazardous trees identified for removal and there is the additional entries removed for the park improvement, the tennis courts and that there. this is the net removal of 70 trees. the reforestation will result in an increase of new trees, of 94. this would be a compensation for the removal and a net increase on top of this.

these are real numbers that are not ambiguous, or unclear to me. >> and this does not compromise the green space for the park? >> there are over 4000 trees. >> glen park canion was my backyard and i did not even know that there was a heating system >> thank you. seeing no other questions from the commission, let me just comment that i do not think there is a member of this commission that is ever happy about taking out a tree unless this is necessary to enhance the overall project. but we are interested in seeing a public process be followed with the people who use the parks and the associations around that me and contribute to

the process to the point where we have a majority of support for improving these projects. i am sympathetic to those who don't want to ever see any tree disappear, i think the evidence is that this has been an extensive process with a very good results. i would intend to support this and would like to entertain a motion. all of those in favor -- aye. opposed, unanimous. >> we are on item 11. general public comment. the general public may address the commission on items in the jurisdiction that are not on the current agenda. and is there any public comment? public comment is closed. item 12, commissioners matters?

and is there any public comment on this item? public comment is closed. item 13, new business? nothing. is the public comment on this item? public comment is closed. we don't have anything listed for communications, item 14. is there any public comment on this item? public, is closed. we are on item 15, adjournment. all of those in favor?

j#qt x d-o ç$n ++

++ that we are doing. perhaps, it is the most exciting, using the historic st. cars -- street cars, adding service on t