ceqa. i do think that based on a ceqa analysis this appeal has merit. if we are talking about the merits of the project and non-ceqa issues, i would be talking about the larger issue of whether or not there is a need for more luxury housing in the mission. i think that's a legitimate question and one that i think should be dealt with and addressed in light of that is displacement that is happening throughout the city but especially in neighborhoods like the neighborhood when it comes to artist who are an endangered species. but that is not the focus of this appeal. it is ceqa and i'm concerned about the analysis that's been provided and i have a lot of respect for planning. but i don't think that there has been sufficient consideration of the changes in this neighborhood. i don't believe that there has been adequate consideration of

ceqa establishes points that leads to other ceqa review after certain mitigations have been adopted and those circumstances change the revision to ceqa review document due to the identification of new significant impacts that were not previously identified or substantially more severe impacts to the ones that were identified or perhaps that mitigation measures that were identified in the nag dak are no longer feasible. so here with the information that has been provided regarding changes in circumstances, none of those conditions could rise to the level of further ceqa review. so with regard to the munis line being eliminated limb and the characterization of the quality. the mmd with regards to transit is the area transit rich or not. the context in which the mmd identified transit services in the area was to describe the transit conditions toond demonstrate the anticipated trips that would be generated by the project would be via the transit mode could be adequately accommodated on transit that is within the area. so the fact that one lane is mitigated. there is other transit in the ar

how can you analyze under ceqa if you don't measure that. ceqa relies on analysis. this the building is 70 feet tall. the nmd analyze notice with respect to the marsh. as a result not. the nmd does not recommended the marsh it's not mentioned in there and it's not noted as the neighbor. there is zero mention, completely and totally emitted from consideration. the people that have lined up here today have given you substantial evidence that are not mentioned in anyway shape or form in the environmental document. the planning told you they did the analysis. that's completely incorrect. i don't know where that comes from. it's not up to the public to provide impact when the analysis has not been completed. we have provided expert testimony that this document is incomplete. we provided common sense. it's not mentioned. how can it be analyzed if it's mentioned. you can't analyze a situation if you never looked at it. that's all we are getting if this environmental document. so you are being provided completely untrue and misinformation. we urge you, use your common sense

and so this is a ceqa appeal. and i think it's important that we are focusing on the ceqa issue. with that, i look forward to discussions today. >> thank you. let me ask the appellants if you can come up to the microphone. you have 10 minutes for the initial presentation. if you have multiple speakers, you can divide it up as you see fit. m are williams. >> thank you, my name is steven williams presenting the a little liberty hill association represents the businesses in the liberty hill historic association to advocation the quality of life in the area, character and historic nature of the area. the association through this appeal challenges the accuracy and sufficiency of the final mitigated negative declaration prepared for the proposed project at 1050 valencia street. to support the appeal, the association retained a well-known ceqa expert richard grassity of grassity environmental consulting and he received and commenting on the declaration of the board and provided that written testimony to the board with our initial pl appeal that is exhibit 2, his resume is attached to ex

ceqa demands evaluations. >> good afternoon. i'm a long time resident of san francisco and i'm here to support highly respect the community based marsh. we celebrated the 25th anniversary and where i have been an audience member and volunteer over a decade and where i have enjoyed many memorable sold out performance at this cultural resource. there are 700 shows with 305 adults and children in the area. i want to propose the majority of the performances by solo artist who require complete silence, although it's silence with loud and enthusiastic applause. the theatres don't mix. i urge you to expand the definition to address the sound to include small theatres and sound to this project. this theatre like the marsh can continue. for those who have not that had pleasure, the marsh and the best audience is an affordable theatre experience in a cultural heart beated of this corner of the mission of san francisco. finally this issue is as much about coexistence as it is about preservation of the marsh. latino culture and the mission

what's the ceqa is about. instead of the document saying it's a project, that's what cumulative project is for is to look at the scale project. >> thank you very much, members of the public you will hear a soft bell which indicates you have 30 seconds and then the latter bell. thank you, next speaker. >> these are the for the supervisors. >> the clerk will pick them up for you. >> hello, i'm stephanie wise man from the marsh. thank you for letting us speak today. everyone who is here from the marsh hills please stand up to let you know the public support for this. also that i know that i have sent out propose mitigation issues to everyone. i want that to be put on the record and we have 105 letters here in addition to whatever else you have in support of the marsh. so, the marsh is one of the most fertile environments there is. it's up to its make the mosaic environmentally. it's the most theatrical vep u in the san francisco and bay area for the past 24 years and the solo performance venues in the world to de

i also have concerns about the fact that even though we are not talking about ceqa. we are talking about asking the develop er to do something to interact with this community that should have been done a while ago. i am concerned that no meeting has taken place sense september of last year. so, for all those reasons, i will be voting against this motion. you know, this is one of those interesting cases where even though this is one of those cases that is not in my district, this is a project that impacts my district tremendously. and i think that we are unfortunately by some of the actions that we have taken putting ourselves in a position where we tell people that we are transit for city but we don't really do anything within what the environmental law allows us to actually acquire mitigation by the people that come forward with these projects to make sure that we are a transit first city. so i think this is one of those cases that ultimately depending on how it goes could set a very good or bad precedent. i like no parking projects and i appreciate the comments fro

with respect to downtown high school, there is a section of ceqa that does require special notice of schools within a quarter mile of the project, but they only require that when a project is anticipated to emit hazardous substance. this is a residential project so both ourselves and the planning department agree that it's not appropriate for this project. we are thrilled to have the opportunity to build these sites and manage these apartments in the future. they have made numerous modifications based on the input. just to go through a couple of those changes shall they have reduced the account and increased the parking spaces and provided those set backs from the upper two floors in addition to the others. those are the main ones. this is the way we would want project sponsors to approach then advertisement process in san francisco. a lot of outreach and willingness to make project modifications based on the input they receive. the project is fully consistent with the eastern neighborhood plans of 2009 and therefore we request that you deny this appeal and allow the project to move