that meant that that analysis had some reason to believe there was an impact. so there was a mitigation measures that referred to the future design having to meet the secondary standards, i believe. but now we have rescinded that mitigation measure because one of the consultants said that it met the standards. >> tim fry on behalf of the planning department. commissioner sugaya: could you clarify? >> the scope of work -- that mitigation remains in place for many other components of the project, because we still want the hcp-required action on the certificate of the appropriateness. there are certain aspects of the building that are not protected under article 10 of the planning room, -- planning law, like the venetian room and the cirque room. the impact would be mitigated so we would not affect those interior resources. for the external portion only, after the draft the i r -- eir was published, they submitted a specification on how the work would proceed. that was enough information for the department to determine that the work would meet the secretary of the

finally, we wanted to call out a couple of major impacts that impact city residents that are not a directact on the budget, most particularly the stage three child care funding which does not come through the city but goes directly to child care organizations. that impacts about 1,000 families, 1,200 kids and about $13 million worth of services. in additions there is the in-home support services, ours, which is estimate to have a value of $3.2 million. you can count that twice because that is a value to the recipients of the service, many who live in the city, the in-home support services provider. moving on to the general revenues. of the $11 million, it is really a bigger picture than that. $18 that we are currently estimating in property tax after setting aside additional funds related to appeals. the payroll tax came in better than expected at the end of fiscal year 2009-2010. this $11 million is basically with flat growth, but it is basically a higher number because last year's number came in hire. we have taken down the projections on investment income. the extra revenues result in

i think it is really important for the board to hear how this funding impact students, and it impact your ability to learn in school, your ability to be leaders, your ability to be in a safe environment and to be successful. thank you so much for sharing your personal story with us tonight. >> i would like to recognize miss wax, who is in the audience, to stand. [applause] >> i'm want to echo your thanks for leshawn and william for coming out and being very brave and talking about incredible impact of these programs. these young people exemplify the impact these programs have on students in our district. there are 55 students like them who are reached by these programs. these programs in gauge, excite, and enhance the learning process for our students. they are given greater exposure to pursue interests outside of the classroom, and greater support from trained professionals to help students cope with issues that may disrupt the learning process. that said, this finding supports a whole list of -- supports a holistic approach to students in schools. without it, our young people will

the eir identifies a potential significant impact in terms of 9 project's impact on the residential historic district and the mitigation required is future environmental review that should mitigate it. one thing that was raised, i recall commissioner sugaya commented on the draft eir and others did, too, you can't assume it's mitigated as significant. there's also analysis of the impact of the new tower on the current landmark. that's another area in which there's question. so what was requested by this commission is alternatives be considered including rehabilitation of the tower as opposed to the demolition and reconstruction. we also have presented as concerns that the project objective, in calling for demolition as an objective when really, it's a means to an end, not a proper ceqa objective and there's case law to support that. and the description that doesn't really show you what the project will look like is inadequate. so fundamental problems. it should be clear from the action the commission already took that there's fundamental revisions that the eir needed, including additional al

some environmental impact. deeper rf and aesthetic impact do not exist. there is no potential for a significant impact you would review in an eir. it just means the project would come back to you in six months with an eir. there is a suggestion this is piecemeal in the project. that would mean that every one of the facilities clear wire is going to install has to be an essential portion of this project. that is not the case. if you are going to have to approve a cup for every location

it would have no impact on them. that the structural integrity of the tower is sound, and they would ensure that it would be continually earthquake ready. as i mentioned, there were no cumulative impact by the installation of these antennas. i will keep that brief in terms of the determination. supervisor mirkarimi: to the planning department, thank you for that context. as it applies to fcc as i understand as it relates to these and tell us, i doubt chernobyl would exceed fcc regulations. i wonder that the predicament we are growing -- from a larger view, an important illustration is that with greater frequency, we are seeing a number of these requests and appeals that is taking a considerable amount of time and rightfully so to deal with what the federal government handicaps us from being able to deal with. for me, i would like us to figure out the master plan kind of health care day, why don't we have some sort of master plan that allows us to consolidate what latitude we have to influence the decisions such as th

avoid environmental impact to the extent possible. menem bias, and if you can't -- if you can't avoid, that buys, and if you can't minimize, mitigate. do it to the maximum extent possible in the planning process. the other way that we avoid impact is through the environmental construction compliance project. if we can't avoid, we minimize impact through the ceqa process so that mitigation measures recommended through ceq aa and the permits, it mitigates impact. for wsip, we have come up with an innovative idea to add benefits and accomplish beneficial environmental planning. we are adding benefits to the habitat restoration. it is a way of consolidating so that instead of being scattered, they are in combined ecological areas that really provide greater benefits. today, we would like to concentrate on the construction compliance program and by regional -- sorry. regional habitat restoration. we will come back to you another time to present the impact avoidance measures and how we accomplished that process. the environmental constructi

some environmental impact. deeper rf and aesthetic impact do not exist. there is no potential for a significant impact you would review in an eir. it just means the project would come back to you in six months with an eir. there is a suggestion this is piecemeal in the project. that would mean that every one of the facilities clear wire is going to install has to be an essential portion of this project. that is not the case. if you are going to have to approve a cup for every location and each could be denied and the facility put somewhere else -- at this facility is what we are asking for today. you are requiring that we continue to be an individual project. piecemeal and does not make sense. cumulative impact does not make sense. one last point about microwave antennas -- the project has been there for 50 years. those are big microwaves and little microwaves without incident. when microscope offline, they shut down. -- when microwaves go offline, the shutdown. in tv gulch, they are all over. each path is regu

this has to do with the in our mental impact report, -- on the environmental impact report, not the request for conditional use and the project itself. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is sam. i find the eir findings laughable and out of touch with the majority of the neighborhood issues. there were simply answered with, "no significant impact on the character, look, and feel of the neighborhood." i find it unbelievable that a large six-story building replacing a two-story building would have no impact. 32 residential units were there were none, at least that many cars, parking, daily traffic, and many more residents. we're not talking about factors, but 38 times, five times as large, and i wanted to make sure that it was noted that it will be a significant impact to the look and feel and the character of that neighborhood. thank you. president miguel: thank you. is there any additional public comment on this item? if not, public comment is closed. commissioners? secretary avery: commissioners, you are now at consideration of findings and final action. a public hearing for this categor

it contends that the project will not impact the eastern view of the fairmont. we stand with the historic preservation commission in saying that the entire as the exception is flawed -- aesthetic section is flawed. it is totally unsatisfactory and contradictory. we request that this eir not be certified. thank you. president miguel: following this, linda stone, irma, jim -- >> i am a resident and property owner in san francisco. it is my understanding that the draft will be certified today under the condition that if it is deemed adequate with completeenss. -- completeness. we don't believe that an attempt was made for the advocacy of the public community. it is unbelievable, and one has to ask, what plan are they on? there are over 700 pages with the proposed project costing millions of dollars and identify only one significant unavoidable impact, how can that be? that's incredible. it defies all reasonable logic and corrupt the true intent. mainly finding a viable way to utilize the existing power. the magnitude of this development defined by its massive size,

impacts is coming out a little after that. it was explicit in the water area and said water manager's should begin a systematic contingency plans and water allocation policys in the context of climate change. interestingly, ten years back, the,awaa, published a climate panel that said while water management systems are often flexible water manager's should examine under a wider range of traditional use. they said it's not uh. they made that recommendation and not that much actually has been done ultimately. many other suggestions of what should be done you've heard a lot of them already. i do want to show this slide. this is mississippi river, the actual flow at saint louis. the data comes from the armed corporation to around the year 2000, to 2001. if you draw a straight line here, the straight red line is basically the flood risk, assume this record is stationary that the climate is not changing. in fact, statistically, if you ⌜"at this record, it's not stationary. average flow in the mississippi river seems to be going on.

there is only a slight impact. if the base line is inappropriate, anything that is larger is inappropriate. if this is undersequa -- under sequa, and then not have control over this, and this is something we will have questions about. from this point of view, to say that the only preservation alternative that you need to provide is what happens to the tonga room. there is only a slight change in the baseline. this is nonsensical. there is no preservation alternative. there is no preservation alternative at all. the preservation alternative is going to look at repeating the frequency, and as it has been mentioned, the tower of the podium, and something else besides what has been prevented. thank you. >> commissioner buckley: i am not certain that we should talk about this because there is a difference in the historical planning and preservation commission. i think that this is there and has been taken into account. i would be prepared to approve of this project at this time. when we hear about this, we can look at t

and then the development impact fees in 401, 416, 421.1 and 421.5 and 421.3, all of the impact fees that apply to the market and octavia plan area which is across the street would be applied to this area that i showed on the map. and then finally there would be notes made to the zoning control in article seven to note all of these changes to the height limits and the rear yard parking. so commissioners, staff analysis of this proposal found this request to be in line with our recent planning work by the department with one exception. the department recommends that the proposed ordinance be modified to grandfather in certain existing applications. most of the ordinances introduced by this commission are the result of lengthy community planning processes which provide some level of notice to property owners and potential developers. because the ordinance did not benefit from the substantial processes whereby potential property owners would be aware of the pending fee changes, the department recommends applying all of the controls upon adoption of the ordinance while providing exemption fro

>> i don't know that it impacted caterpillar so much. the disconcerting thing to me is that washington, particularly the house of representatives, but the congress in general has passed legislation without regard to how it impacts american firms and their ability to compete in world markets. i think the health care legislation that passed does add a lot of cost to businesses. it has created a lot of uncertainty. and it is impeding the employment growth that might be coming at this stage of the economy recovery. another very interesting thing to me that's not talked about very much about the unemployment rate, which is very high. the 16 to 24-year-old group, for example, their unemployment rate has always been higher. but it's been kind of in the 12 to 15% range. now it's approaching 30. it's 27 to 30. the reason for that kind of economics 101. the house under pelosi's leadership passed a 41% increase in the minimum wage. and on top of that now we add a lot of regulatory cost and health care costs that has dramatically increased the cost

joining us, to discuss the millennium development goals, and the impact of the global financial crisis on the world's poorest countries are noam unger, global economy and development fellow at the brookings institution, and director of the foreign assistance reform project; and jonathan white, senior program officer in the economic policy program at the german marshall fund. gentlemen, thanks for being with us on great decisions. >> thank you. >> in 2000, world leaders gathered in new york city, at the united nations, and charted the way forward for the global development agenda. they came up with what are known as the millennium development goals. ah, what in essence are these goals, and why should americans care about them? >> well, the goals are essentially, ah, focused on reducing extreme poverty in half, ah, cutting hunger in half. and that's important in today's world, because you have one billion people living on the planet on less than a dollar a day. it's important in today's world, because you have, now, after the financial crisis, a billion, a little over a billion people, a

it reduces space, and expanding the existing library impact key recreational one part functions -- impacts key recreational and heart functions. we're very proud of our track record with historical renovations. only in cases where the community saw the need for a new, larger library was a new building design. we have received numerous historic preservation awards. we are very proud of our carnegie library, our workers progress buildings. we have several of those. and our century-old library that just celebrated 100 years last year, and with the opening of the park side library i invite you to attend this saturday, we will have renovated six mid- century modern library buildings. the existing building is not seismically safe, and it is woefully inadequate to meet the needs of a contemporary library and in keeping with the goals of the branch library improvement program, which is safe, accessible buildings. the library commission endorsed the new site. i urge you to reject landmarking the existing north beach library, as doing so will impede our progress towards realizing that vision toward

the response to the construction impact of this relatively modest change our kind of phenomenal. there is also a fully grown construction management program and a detailed response to the late submission about construction impacts. the construction impacts of this project are the overwhelmingly responded to, and if you wait before you make judgment until you see presentation of the project, new will see the extraordinary things they have undertaken in order to respond to potential construction impacts. it is really quite remarkable, including building and interior room. lastly, the suggestion that the project may not in the internment of document -- in the environmental document have analyzed the historic status i did not believe is accurate. the environmental document is beyond question of adequate, accurate, and objective. thank you. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> 9 ray brown -- i'm ray brown, and i speak to you as a resident of bronco lake erie we are right across the street from the fairmont. we are going to get all the noise, all the construction dust. i'm here as a very

the only real visual impact on the house is the panels. the other stuff is almost never seen. the thing about solar panels is they work during the day owl. so the big question is what about at night? well when isn't shining. in the past the only solution you had to that was batteries. you would have to purchase a large group of batteries and wire them to your system. during the day the sun would produce what your house needed and charge up the batteries and at nighttime you would draw off the batteries. what has made solar go from a niche market and explode to a big popular market has been a breakthrough called net metering. because the sunshines differently during different parts of the year it makes sense to go for a whole year before you settle accounts. so you get a statement every month, but you don't have to pay it unless you want to. your credits or debits roll over from month to month and at the end of the year you settle accounts. the key concept is magical in a sense. the utility grid is a two-way street. you can send electricity back up in the lines. because you can

various capacity in the system to deal with some of the impacts of climate change. so i think there's capacity there and something you out to look at. then finally, back to add ing a couple of issues to chart on here. one if you have not done it you should look at your financial systems and rate stability that now particularly to deal with rate increases in the future. you should be paying a lot of attention to where you are now with rates. you need to keep flexible. the biggest problem i have now is people trying to solve my problems for me to invest in today to solve something 30 or 40 years from now and to make huge capitol investments today might not be the right approach and you need to all look at that in our own utilities. we need to react and not over-react and do things that don't make sense and cause our rate payer as lot of sense and are not going to contribute to solveg the problem. we're going to get a lot more information year by years we go forward. finally i would really reiterate what you really need to do is try and get control overall those things

it's looked at both in terms of the economy and the impact on the environment. when you are looking at evaluating different strategies against those future scenarios, you are looking at how those different scenarios not only influence the environment in terms of the number of carbon emissions and the residues that are produced, but also at how much money they are going to have available to invest in adaptation strategies. because both the things are closely interlinked. so it isn't just looking at the impact side, it's looking at their capability of coping with climate change. it's those two aspects that are rolled in together there. perhaps that will help to answer that question a little bit. >> i expect the two of you can talk more afterwards. . >> mary, it seems that defining the problem is going to help drive what we look at as solutions. in your opening statements you mentioned you have plants at 20 feet and you are looking at projections at 9 to 25 feet. that's a big difference. if we're going to spend half a billion dollars in the next couple years in cal

they are also going to be impacted by the increased health care costs. i think that's the main reason here that proposition b is imposing greater health care costs on city employees than ever before and it's going ton -- to have an impact on their ability to provide health care to their children, to keep their same doctor and health plan and to do all the thicks a person wants to do to take care of their family. >> thank you, sheriff. so if this measure were to pass, how would the citizens of san francisco be impacted in sflb the citizens of course, a number of citizens are city employees and they'll be impacted in their pocket book because they'll have to pay a lot more to maintain health care. some are going to drop health care, drop a dependent off their health care or they're going to have to drop their long-term family doctor they were able to choose under one health plan but won't be able to choose if they go to the cheapest health plan available. it's going to impact health care proifers, nurses, teachers, people who provide health services in san

it erroneously conclude that there are no loading impact. finally, a division floating is inconsistent. thank you. president miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am paul fisher. i am appearing as a california architect. the developer has rejected the idea of the existing power because he says, without substantiation, it has too many columns and the ceilings are only 8 feet high. i was able to pick up a good friend of the existing floor plan and original architecture. i also got a supporting opinion as an ex -- from an experienced structural engineer. we looked during the construction period, and the engineer said, [unintelligible] that is the way they did things in those days. i personally measured 94 inches from the other side of the ceiling slab. incomparable high end condos, this would be the ceiling. comparable project include the millennium, saint regis, and they are all about 9 feet or 10 feet. as for the dreaded columns, i did a layout. is that going through? a sample, it shows that the unit worked out very nicely. t