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 but now we have rescinded that mitigation measure because one of the consultants said that it met the standards.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

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

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

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

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

this has to do with the in our mental impact report, -- on the environmental impact report, not the requestfor 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 category

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.

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

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

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

people living here in the marina, let's say, did it impact you? no, very low impact. but it happens quite often in san francisco. sizing up, looking at incendiary explosive events, primary danger is obvious. biological chemical -- let's get back here. can you see? biological, radio logical event may take place there. biological, thinking about anthrax, plague, don't really worry about prairie dog colonies here in san francisco. botulism. routes, you notice we've talked about that before, how would these agents get into our body system? inhaling it, ingesting, eating it or skin absorption, coming in contact with it. nuclear device, there's different types, there's nuclear dirty bombs radioactive release. incendiary incident, any kind of mechanical or electrical device used to start a fire. different nerve factors. the department of transportation, explosive devices take place, some indicators in environment, are you looking for any type of unattended packages or boxes in high risk areas, liquids, mist -- this is going to be a biological or chemical release. numerous si

what is the real impact it is having? in the next budget on the 15, we are able to show some results of that. but i really want to thank you for being part of this committee. i know that i still have one more point, but everyone i have asked to be on this -- my other appointee has said this is so much work i cannot do it. when i see you here tonight and know all the other nights you have been at these meetings, i really want to extend our heartfelt appreciation and gratitude for all your time and service to the children of this district. thank you. commissioner wynns: actually, some of my comments will follow and be in line with some of the things that commissioner fewer said. i want to thank all of you. a particularly thank you young men for testifying this evening. i think it is a difficult thing to do. we thank you very much for that. this is what i have been thinking. i appreciate that we have -- we are evaluating the individual program funded through prope h, to the public in richmond fund, as much as we can. but i d

on service, especially when you have that number -- does have a negative impact on service. over the last 18 to 24 months, the signal -- there is an upgrade to the software, the software being on board the train. it recognizes when a train is going from.1 mota into -- going from one mode into another. the fleet was retrofitted and completed in the second week of october, and it has been from the end of that time in october to september -- what that tells us is, number one, the software if it is working, that the trains are accepting and getting automatic train control. in addition to that, what we need to continue to look at is the maintenance of the wayside equipment and then other causes on the vehicle that could cause a trained not to get the signal system, so in that particular system, we have an average of some 200 plus per month. the principal change has been the software fix that has been developed in concert would signal manufacturers, and those instances are going down. we can trust them. the second type of instance that happens, in in a couple of these, it has been