of water to remove from that wet land system. it will increase the rate, the volume, the entirety of the number of days which the existing pump house can operate which will collectively increase the amount of water that is removed from that system. that water is essential to almost every single element biological element of that wet land complex which ought to be fairly obvious. to illustrate why that is so. the california red legged frog requires a habitat to hide from predators and in particular in order to breed. when waters are removed from that system too rapidly, the egg masses of the frog are exposed to the air, they desiccate and this air mass dries out and they die. it

happens nearly every year that large numbers of california red leg ed frogs are stranded at sharp park under existing rates of water removal at sharp park. if we in accrues -- increase that rate of change, it will become worse. it's the rate of change that is motor -- most important to the species. it will adapt to small changes in the water level that occur under normal conditions. when the pumps are turned on and started to remove more than 10,000 gallons, it's not able to adjust to. the department has said there is no changes to the pump house protocols on the one hand while on the other hand they say these pumps are the basis for the environmental

conditions of the project. those baseline environmental conditions have never been considered by any environmental review document ever by the recs and park department or planning department. there is no document we can reference to understand what the environmental consequences are of those existing pump house rates and this project it says on its face that it will enhance those rates and encourage more water to be removed from the system. so even if they were correct that it is within the baseline of the existing conditions are within the environmental baseline, that change has not been reviewed whatsoever. the primary way they explain or justify rely that their baseline conditions is through this biological opinion that the fish and wild life created. what they fail to inform you of that biological opinion is

being challenged before the 9th circuit court of appeals, that biological opinion is not applicable at this time. in order for the recs and park department to rely upon it, the army corpse of engineers must allow the city to change the water flow at sharp park and incorporate that in the permit. the fish and wild life service in november 13th, wrote to the army corp of engineers that it includes in the biological opinion that endangers the species act only applicable when authorized by permit issued by the army corp of engineers and that may never happen. it has it's own

criteria to determine whether this process is appropriate. until that incurs that biological opinion, they can't rely on that to be the departmental baseline. i have a copy for your review and record. the other issue of concern here and why the environmental impact is we have before you in exhibit f of our appeal expert opinion that explains that there will be significant environmental effects if this project moves forward. this is no ordinary expert. greg okay man developed the baseline report for the san francisco recs and park department that has regarded every single document made since. he had received this proposal based on the changes and reviewing the

changes said there will be significant effects on the environment if this project moves forward. that alone a dispute between agency of that level of expertise creates the requirement for a full blown ir to be created. it goes beyond that technical issue. what is likely to happen from this project is one of two things: either the proposal will in fact increase the rate of water being shuttled out of the system or it will reverse it. if -- one of the concerns that is raised because of the water levels are lower than the water levels at horse stable pond, if we remove that you will sediment, that friction from the system, it will cause the waters from horse stable pond

through the force of gravity to flood the waters even more. thank you very much and again we request that you order a full blown e ir for this project. >> thank you. project sponsor, please? >> good afternoon, commissioners, my name is lisa wayne for the san francisco recs and park department and work as a land manager and natural resources manager for 15 years and a large part of my experience is at sharp park. i have information about the project and background for the project. sharp park is an over 400-acre property and includes

a golf course over a third of the property. the remaining land of two-thirds most of this skug -- discussion is on the west side of the property, the wet land complex which contains lagoon and horse stable ponds. that horse stable pond on the southwest corner of the property is a pump house that removed flood waters from the property through a pipe in the seawall to the pacific ocean. these pumps regularly operate through rainy season after rain events and during rain events. it's important that the entire water shed flows through our property down to that pump house at horse stable pond. not only the land that runs through

our property but the residential areas north and south of the us and highway 101 to our property. there are animal species that rely on that wet land complex. they are protected by state and federal laws. the federal endangered species act. these statutes prohibit harm to these species without a permit. knowingly violating these statutes can be find or imprisonment. these projects are highlight watched and regulated by the federal and state regulatory agencies. so just real quickly a little bit about the species here. this is the california red leg

ed frog threatened species. this is a pond in shallow water. it lays closest to the masses of december through march. it's a large egg mass the size of a grapefruit and contains thousands of eggs. it's a retreat from predators for the frog itself. the garter snake is indeed a beautiful animal and very limited in its range. it occurs only in san mateo and northern santa cruz county. like most snakes it wants to thermal regulate and use those upland areas to warm itself and uses

burros to protect from other vegetation. i would like to put that project in an a little bit of context and give a little bit of background. the sharp park property was deeded to the city of san francisco by the sharp family with the expressed purpose that that property remain for recreational purposes. in the 1930s the sharp park golf course was built and through much of the 20th century the golf course and the surrounding wet lands were managed. the channels, horse stable pond were cleared of vegetation and the sediments and the pump removed water from the course. in 2005, the parks and recreation department was informed we were in violation of the species act because of our pumping operations. that is to say exposing the eggs to air

and exposing those embryonic frogs. they need to stay moist to increase the life cycle. as part of the san francisco parks and recreation department implemented proerd to protect these endangered species. these were complied in 2009. in 2012, the fish and wild life service, the regulatory agency that overseas the protection of these animals issued a biological opinion for the pump house project which is in front of you today. the biological opinion and it's associated federal permit allows the san francisco parks and recreation to implement the proposed project provided we comply with a number of measures conservation measures of terms and conditions. in addition to providing the authorization for the actual project itself, the

biological opinion also address the on going operations and maintenance of the golf course. this is one of a suite of requirements in regulatory permits that we do and will continue to seek and we are seeking from a number of agencies one of those is the core of engineers. we are actively working with them right now to obtain a permit from them, there is california coastal commission and the water control board and the state of california and many many other permitting agencies. so there are a long list of requirements and i won't go into those. this is anna bridged version of the medical and biological opinion. i will call your opinion to the pumping protocols. there are very stringent protocols for me and staff to look for egg masses and keep the pump levels

appropriate even if it means flooding the golf courses. we are protecting those egg masses. the pumping protocols themselves and the amount of water that is moved through course depends on how much rainfall there is and how much water is removed from the course depends on where we set the pumps and where we find the egg masses. there is no change in the protocols as proposed as part of this project and the amount of rain water is depend on the monitoring and the egg masses and the pump operations. there are also many measures of mowing, the timing and speed limits of the mowers. and at the very bottom you will see the perennial pond construction and that is on this opinion that will be built next year.

so really quickly i would like to highlight the project addresses three critical issues for us. workers safety, infrastructure protection and species conservation. so within the category of workers safety, there is unsafe access for the workers that maintain the pump infrastructure. the construction of the access walkway that is part of this project will enable the workers to safely clear debris from the tract rack that shows here that leads to the pumps. secondly the infrastructure proceedings. here is a picture of the sharp pump house that contains the two pumps. sediment and plant material that builds up near the entry to the pump house inlet can be drown to the pump intake and destroy the pumps themselves. it's necessary for

the parks and recreation to clear the vegetation in order to protect that infrastructure. finally species conservation in the absence routine vegetation clearing at horse stable pond, there has been a reduction in the value of the habitat. remember i set that open water, shallow open water is a prime habit at that time for the red legged frog. you can see the dark area is open water. in 2010, you can see it's reduced more and the dark area in this photograph in 2013 shows how much is left now terms of open water habitat. that represents and over all 58 percent of loss water habitat in 8 years. the outline from 2005 and today. what that means is that without

that shallow open water habitat for breeding, the vegetation is too dense and too fixed for the frogs to deposit their egg masses and so we are losing a concurrent amount of habitat as we lose that open water vegetation. in final moments here, this is just a view again of 2005, the horse stable pond area and how much it's filled in 6 years later. so it's critical that we keep this water body open, not only for the protection of the infrastructure, but also the protection and conservation of the species. thank you very much. i will be available for questions. >> thank you. open up for public comment. i have a number of speaker cards. if you can lineup on the side of the room, please.

>> thank you very much, madam president. my name is bough links. on behalf of our group, we would like to express our opinion. we have submitted a letter to you previously with multiple copies. i have an extra copy with me today for the clerk. i would like to adjust a few comments. the appellants here have every right to choose their cause, but not the fact. the fact is that this piece of property a hundred years ago was surveyed by the united states geological service and it was designated as salt valley. lagoon saladas

is salty laevenlg -- lake. the reason there is habitat is john maclaren created this golf course. one because mckenzie was the greatest golf course architect in history. this was done for private parties. this is his only sea side public course. and it was the first tournament of the western states golf association. one of the oldest and largest african american golf societies in america. the group primarily responsible for making sure that the pga tour is fully

integrated. the work proposed is not drenched up on a dirty napkin in somebody's kitchen. this is an on going discussion taken place over many years by the very responsible planners and scientist and workers and staff. i submit to you this is responsible stewardship of a treasured asset. the fact is that the golf course and the species have coexisted for over 80 years. i submit to you most respectfully that this work and this staff should be commended and not criticized. we urge you again to support and adopted the mitigated negative declaration. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is teddy collins. i'm a san francisco resident for 4 years now and before that attended stanford

university where i played on the golf team. since january i have been a very active golf player in the san francisco bay area. i can say there are many great golf courses but very few that is as affordable and easily acceptable in sharp park. you can play there for as little and $30. it's really one of handful and an area treasure. every year there is a fundraiser put on by the san francisco golf alliance where several hundred people get together and show support of the course. additionally every week you have a very wide variety and range of both socioeconomic and racial diversity who meet at the golf course. so i kind of urge that you support the negative mitigated declaration and this golf course is one of the very

few public resources where local residents can enjoy affordable round of golf. thank you. >> my name is nora berkman. a resident of pacifica and a member of the golf club. i have lived in pacifica for 30 years and during that time i took up golf. throughout that period of time i regularly walked the berm to the west of the course. i have watched the marsh from both sides from the walker and bird watcher side of the world. the marsh habitat seems to be flourishing under the parks and recreation. it's better than it was than the early 80s when i

moved to pacifica. i'm not going to get into studies that seem to show that in fact the frogs are doing fairly well and have actually population has seemed to have grown since the 80s. but, what i will say is that as members of the course golf club they course, our membership is very diverse, we are all people who treasure our environment and we respect the privilege of playing in a beautiful place that also has sensitive habitat. our members are well versed in what they need to do to prevent any harm to that habitat and to the diversity of creatures living there. i speak from the heart when i say i would hate to lose this treasure. it's part of our community and pacifica and we

meet and regularly there all people of all ages and ethnicities and inclinations. it's a great place and it's truly one of the center points in our community. please uphold the negative mitigation declaration and i thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker? good afternoon, commission. my name is harris. i have played at the golf course and continue to play today. i teach the young children the game of golf and a golf coach. i encourage the staff recommendations and i

brought a short video. i created a few on a sunday that i went out the sharp park to show the diversity of who is out there. not all the sharp golfers can come out to support this so i created a short video. [video] this shows some of the

diversity at sharp park. thank you for all your work to keep it moving forward and a great place for the frogs and snakes. thank you. >> hi. my name is robert bradley. i'm a local photographer. i recently photographed sharp park extensively for a book. i believe the renovations to

improve the habitat is important. i think sharp park is a wonderful place to play golf in the bay area and it is a great cause. thank you. >> calling a few more names. stan ? >> hello. my name is stan and i

live in pacifica. rather than talk about what's going on the east, i would like to talk about what's going on in the west. some of you may know that a bag has completed a sediment study down to pedro point the sound end of pacifica. what this has shown, it hasn't been completed yet, but for the first set of facts, rocca way beach will be no more. we are looking at 20-50 years here. linda mar beach which is one of our most beautiful beaches will not be recognizable and it's very iffy whether that will surprise or not. we leave our third beam, our park. if the berm stays up as the ocean rises, the beach will

disappear. what that means, pacifica, a town of 40,000 people will be left with no beaches. i would strongly suggest that we need a complete e ir for the hydrology for the future. we also know that politically speaking, the governments are finally starting to get active and the feds themselves will throw most of their money towards the east coast where most of the money is. the california's will throw most of the money towards the bay area where the money and people live. there is not a lot of money for our coastal towns. i would rather see multimillion dollars going to save parts of towns, the people's homes than a single business. i think there is a better way to spend this money and i would like to live in a town that has at

least one beach left for my ancestors. >> my name is margaret goddel. i live in pacifica. i'm an advocate for pacifica and for keeping beach into future. i ask you to consider not merely what people have today, what people want for themselves for the next 10-20 years. but to look at the possible effect that your actions may have on existence of a city and economic survival of the city down the line. if you agree to the negative declaration you very likely are going to be an approving a two pronged attack on pacific a. if you allow more

pumping, you may ultimately destroy our rare coastal lagoon. this past summer with extra heat, right now with extra heat, with global warming, the surface water are below that recommended by u.s. fish and wild life. it didn't come up with the rains, it came up to the minimum level and now it's back down again. if the pumping continues as it has, then they will move into that lagoon and it will get smaller. do you want to continue to dredge, continue vegetation. where do you want to put your money in a process that will end up with no lagoon in pacifica. if in order