so mitigation is feasible. >> there are a [sra-eurts/] variety of ways for mitigation. application and mitigation measures is one way to reduce impacts. in alternatives, since you couldn't reduce the shadow impact for mitigation measures we looked at reduction of the impact through the alternatives that we need to look at in the eir. so we had a very robust alternatives analyses in the eir, and that was one of them that we choose to explore. >> i actually want to move to kind of other open space, which within ceqa we can analyze. is there a plan or timeline in terms of what departments we may or may not have maintain and acquire open space that was previously under the redevelopment agency? >> that is not a question that i have the information right at-hand to answer, but we can get back to you around that question. >> i think with prop k, it will be an interesting conversation. obviously some of us weren't expecting the dissolution of the redevelopment agency, but now it has taken place, we have a number of open space under the supervision of the now successor agency a

i file the building permit when i file for mitigation; is that correct? it this ordinance were adopted this map would become available to the public. and we intend to set up if you put a cursor over our parcel it will show you the prospective applicant people would be notified through the permit tracking system whether they would be subject to this requirement >> yeah, but did you understand my question with regards if you pull up a 12 month building permit and i know in one case it took two years how are we helping people? that you i guess i feel like my point is d b i is too late. why do we have to have is a building permit could that not be triggered off a building process. at the end say to a building permit person it's up to you to make sure you do it >> anytime a project is not exempt from environmental review the categorical exemption but anything larger than that comes into our office even the small projects our staff would review the project site grins the map and at that time, identify to them there's a requirement that they to go to the health

the planning department we have a process through the environmental review and sequa documents mitigation projects are attached as the conditions are required to go through the same process through the sequa process. and that resigns on the sequa process is cumbersome and it also means we currently have two different procedures for dealing with the same issue. one area required by code is blue zones and the orange areas where it's you know the process happens through our sequa review. the planning department and department of health are proposing to update it and we want to be update. there is one codified process that deals with everything that. we want to expand the boundarys so it would be in the blue and orange and other zones. the ordinance will update the department of health procedures to recognize what's happening that there are health levels that are determined by the state. and it also recognized that was health department test the ground water in some situations. it is more likely that the health and safety is protected and provided better service to the public. and the departm

it for the department of health. >> well, they don't necessarily need to mitigate but they need to goo the department of health whether there's soil contamination at their site. >> this could open up, you know, you'd have a remodeling permit and all of a sudden at 50 cub it yards your project stops until this is mitigated. but the key say you note the location it's mostly around the sequa areas but this expanded now pretty much to citywide. so you could in the mission and you could be remodeling and i go beyond the cub it areas that project has to stop >> i don't believe the project has to stop. while the applicant is working with the department of health and what to do about soil contamination - >> but i know it could take 5 months or a year. >> nothing about this ordinance would change the amount of time. >> because of the expansion of this i want to be clear i want to look around the corner and obviously everybody arrests with this ordinance but what does it mean to people who pull permits and find themselves in the new expanded area? that you it's our intention. >> it's our tennis

it's not coming with any mitigation plans. i think we have to ask the mtc to put mitigations into the plan . the only mitigations that i read in there right now are about during construction, that they would somehow mitigate displacement impact during construction, but i really think the impact comes after the housing is built. so, i think that's something that this planning department should look at. another impact that i thought was alarming was that it looks like vehicle miles traveled may increase in already dense areas where there is already level service f. so, i think that means basically in very congested areas where we already have bad air quality, there is going to be even more congestion. and i assume that is low-income neighborhoods, communities of color. i assume that is areas in san francisco that really don't have any more tools to figure out how to increase the air quality. and, so, i think again that is something we need to ask mtc to help us think about since we're talking most of the growth through this plan

and it's not mitigation measures. we had to look at alternatives that would reduce the significant cumulative impact. or the contributions to the cumulative shadow impact. >> and i understand that. that is part of your ceqa analysis. but under your prop k analysis, i'm still not clear as to why this building, which clearly is going to shadow union square, which ought to have protections under prop k, why alternatives to what we currently have aren't more seriously considered? >> i mean, we aren't making -- i'm sorry. >> sorry, good afternoon, president chiu. i just wanted to clarify that the prop k approval processes has not taken place for this project. it would happen after the appeal of this project. we have alternatives that are feasible that have been fully analyzed in the eir and those are up, if the decision-makers were to find them to be feasible, they could adopt the alternatives that we are speaking of. those are fully analyzed alternatives and prop k analysis, i mean, the approval process has not yet gone.

and then essentially a one liner says there is no feasible mitigation. well, it's clear that a 351' building is impact -- without a single dollar figure provided for the cost difference between the 351' building and the 520' by building being proposed, the case law is clear, you cannot do that. >> if i understand you presented in your letter some discussion around the public subsidy and it's your perspective that you think that this issue could be mitigated if the building for, for example not as tall as proposed? >> we think that issue warranted investigation and we strongly urge the board to require some independent financial analysis of the value that the city is giving or transferring by virtue of increased floor area, the real estate, the garage area and what is the city getting back? is it a fair deal is one issue. the other issue, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate in in order to demonstrate that. >> thank you, colleagues, questions for mr. lippe? >> thank you very much. we'll go to miss brandt-hawley. >> good afternoon president chiu a

it that project going to be stopped until this is mitigated? >> no, we resend to department of health we can't stop it because they measure is and do the approval at the time. >> okay come back to temporary solution i suggest to go to planning and then the developer or anyone who need to make sure, you know, require to do that study. then second item is department of health come to our station on the fifth floor to answer all those questions and check the area or maybe issue the letter right there to speed up the process. then they also future our pbs system can put in another safeguard. the permit is - you may be, you know, depend upon the size of project >> just one question. how many staff inspectors have to deal with this? >> we have half 0.5 currently. >> so you're going to expand the whole program? >> definitely not. we're still looking at the anticipated number of projects and we'll be developing our staff at that time, but we are currently staffing with zero .5 staff >> just a clarification does that half time f t also have other respon

we're asking you to reject is appeal we'll be talking about mitigating the safety and traffic issues. we believe this project will add to the district and be a great addition adding a lot of vibrancy that he ask for your support. thank you very much >> supervisors. if there were enough time i'd happily go on about the wonderful museum. what is clear it's long over cue it the mexican museum have a permanent home. whatever the proposals of this project there was a indirect link of the amount of space and the finance. on behalf of those members who are latino and those who have looked at the reports that's the single construction industry i think they would be extremely proud to work on a project like that. with regard to some of the appellants points i note that the other end of the block is the 44 story hotel building and many of those who testified on behalf of the hotel live on the opposite side of the hotel. it's a block of tall buildings. i note with the pedestrian issues are very real in that neighborhood is that the end of my time? >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello, i'm shawn

you don't have the mitigation because the eir is not adequate >> thank you colleagues any questions? let me ask again any questions to any of the members today? okay at this time this appeal has been heard and is now final that matter is in the hands of the board and one of the members want to speak before i make a motion >> so i do want tow appreciate everyone's time as i kind of devoted into eir position into the city. where we're going to continue and expect to see that development which i actually support i really hope we as a city consider what anna rofblt analysis looks like. i have severe concerns about how we as a city study the impacts and it's not clear to one point our tipping point is which an idea is significant and when it's not. we as policymakers find it confusing and not able to get concrete numbers we saw this with the at at the light boxes that the response is highly subjective and that it's a judgment call. so why i worry about it because we're planning real neighborhood where real people live i get to experience that on a daily basis but as a representative that

and it is broader than that and it does include mitigation for, close to the central freeway and that is where these specific park uses come from and you are correct from that it requires transportation improvements and within that broad umbrella includes mitigation for transportation, and specifically these parks. >> okay. >> thank you. i vaguely recall that, but i thought it was primarily for the park, within the octavia boulevard and the plans for the kind of open space that was required to be in that area. >> yes, so it includes the area north of market, and specifically octavia boulevard but it also does include this area just where we brought the freeway down and as an off-ramp to mitigate the creation of this off-ramp into the soma west community. >> got it, thank you. that really helps to clear things up. >> do you have a map of the octavia plan? >> we will provide it because my district is included in the market octavia plan as well. >> yeah, and i just want to add that i know that there has been a number of active participants and developing this plan there has been a lot of

mitigations to the neighborhoods that are surrounding the freeway as well. in many ways this is part of an exchange that we have with the state and so we are responsible now for making mitigations and one is of course the pedestrian safety, and some of the projects that were brought up in the slide presentation and additional trees in the neighborhood and some of the, sorry i am pulling up, the street skate improvements and the traffic calming and the bike lanes are some of the concerns that we have made and one of the last pieces was for increasing open space in these dense neighborhoods. also, 66,000 dollars of rpv's maintenance class will be provided by this octavia fund which is from the sales of the parcels of the freeway. so there are additional revenues come ng that will not fully cover all of the maintenance costs which i believe was an estimate of $80,000. but 66,000 of that will come from the octavia boulevard project fund and so there are increasing dollars and i think that i agree with supervisor breed and there is a long time discussion in terms

does this go towards mitigation? how should it be used? how should this information be used to? i use it to dole out treatment. that is how i thought we would kick start this seminar. i am happy to answer any other questions. i did not do this all by myself. i had a lot of individuals who helped me with this data. this research is all funded by the national research of health, your tax dollars. thank you for your attention. i will turn over to our moderator. thank you. [applause] >> actually, i would like to, i'm going to ask a few questions, but i was hoping we could get a debate going here rather than with me trying to ask intelligent questions and just have the very smart people just talking amongst themselves to educate us. so one of the questions that we're wanting to talk about today was the idea of free will in terms of the criminal justice system. and i would like to ask each of you, is there a definition of free will in the context of your individual work? we'll start with you, doctor. >> i would punt that one right over to david who is the expert in free will, and then

and just as importantly to put forth mitigation measures to address those impacts. and of course, as with any e-i-r, identify and analyze a reasonable range of alternatives. and then provide the basis for modified c-e-q-a review. just very briefly talk about the alternatives. as with any e-i-r, this draft e-i-r covers the new project alternative which assumes all the land uses and local policies that existed in 2010 along with the 2010 transportation network. and then the proposed plan sarah and liz described to you already, and then an alternative section talks a little about the transit priority focus alternative, and that basically focuses future household growth and concentrates on the pda areas which a map you've seen earlier in the presentation. and then it has an mtc's preferred transportation investment strategy which as liz mentioned provides 90% of the funding towards o and m existing facilities -- i'm sorry, i misspoke. the transit bay area focus alternative actually is a little bit different from the preferred [speaker not understood] strategy in that [s

my view is that this evidence has not been particularly useful either as aggravation or as mitigation. so i have been doing an empirical study over the past six years now to look at, introduction in criminal cases. it's equivocal at best. it sometimes ends up being aggravating, but so far it hasn't panned out. why hasn't it panned out? in part because science isn't quite there yet in that we're able to see some things at a group level, but being able to talk bay single individual to look at their brain and to understand the extent to which their brain differences contribute to their behavior is very challenging. there just isn't enough data for that yet. you can say things at a groupwide level, though. and so kent mentioned earlier the case out of florida in the sue presume court graham in which the court said the juvenile should be treated differently with respect to life without the possibility of parole. the same happened in simmons where the court has treated juveniles differently. it may be the case we can start to do that. we can start to categorize people. we categorized a grou

there's been a mitigation specialist jeffrey and i were just talking about working with jodi arias for months and months and visiting her in jail. she's been in jail for four and a half years so plenty of time to assess just what quality she is as a person and how much, i hate to say it, it really comes down to the qualities of jodi as a person, whether she is worth saving, or the a essential evils of this woman and whether she is worth putting to death. so two more phases.

first, notwithstanding mitigation, provided under the security plan, the building structure equipment cannot adequately accommodate the type of volume and vehicle and pedestrian traffic. the premises of the proposed operation has adequate safeguard to prevent among other things emissions of noise and glare that would substantially interfere with the public health, safety, and welfare. and the permit has not provided a security plan that adequately addresses safety of persons and property. the important fact to keep in mind -- and we have reviewed the city's and live nation's briefs in opposition -- essentially the position taken in those briefs is that the c-e-q-a findings that were issued in conjunction with approving the america's cup project are not, well, effectively binding, i guess, on the entertainment commission. but somehow the entertainment commission could find that none of these commission -- or conditions are met despite the fact that a significant and unavoidable impacts were found in particular with regard to traffic and noise, yet this permit was issued by the entertai

have pcos posted from north beach all the way up to the ferry building to deal with the traffic mitigations. pco's ~ the good thing we have about the plan in place now is it's a fluid situation. so, all of our management team, myself included, we will be out there and can make adjustments as they occur, much like what we did in the events in october. so, given the amount of staffing that we are putting out at this venue, i am more than confident that the neighborhoods will not see the impacts that they expect. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >>> good evening, commissioners. i'm morton beebe. i'm a resident at 150 lombard, have been there for the past 30 years. i've always lived either on the hill or at the base of the hill. i started back in '62 up on green street on the top of telegraph hill. for a brief time i moved over to sauce lead owe, but i guess i missed the action of north beach and the rhythm and the activities of telegraph hill so i moved back and have been there active in the community. ~ i've been on the board of telegraph hill association. i helped to form a

which doesn't seem to be sufficiently recognized or mitigated in the eir. i commute to the south bay and everyday i have to go in and out through stevenson or the one-way road under jesse street and i can tell you right now that is quite difficult. there was a large fedex truck blocking it this afternoon as i came home. sometimes is there is a traffic logjam of cars, even on stevenson or 3-d and sometimes 3rd and jessie try they close down the access. it seems to me there are lots of things that could be done about this one thing is in and out traffic. and i know this is an exception to either the bus stop nearby or the policy on mission street, but it seems so many exception are being made to create the eir, we could make some exceptions to make mitigations as well. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. . >> chairman, supervisors, my name is ron wornick and i live at 765 market and i'm pleased to have a couple minutes of your time. i recognize fully that this issue will be adjudicated ultimately by those who sit over the nuances of the particular issues t

but if there is a significant impact, we should state it and figure out mitigations for the neighborhood on our open space. open space is at a premium in the south of market, as well as in supervisor chiu's district, 3 and 6. so if we're going to impact our open space usage and we have the least amount of open space per capta per capita, i think what i am trying to get at is that just because we can't mitigate we can't say it's not significant. >> in the opinion, we worked with our specialists and we had consultants who worked with us and when we looked at it in the context of the questions, what is the duration of the shadow? what is the timing? what kind of use that the park has? how would it affect the usability of the park? we found that the lead agency and we have experts that help us figure out our opinions, and this is an urban open space, where there is dense development around it. given the context of all of this, we came to the conclusion at the project level this was less than significant impact, but when we looked at it in the cumulative context, this was considered as part o

we feel that this demonstrates that that architectural construction is sufficient to provide mitigation between the commercial space and the residences above in this building. thank you. >> thank you. >> do you have any information on live nation? i'm just kidding. >> i actually have a question for you. have you seen the conditions the appellant submitted? >>> not until it was just handed to us tonight. >> so, you haven't had a chance to read these? >>no. >> that's fine. i just wanted to know if you had an opinion about what's in them. not yet. that's fine. thank you. >> i have a question for ms. workman. ms. workman? what kind of tenant is your client envisioning potentially renting the space? >>> well, we actually have gene coe here who is the broker who can talk to you more specifically about that. but they are looking for a very i think conventional office tenant for that space. is that okay if gene responds? >>> just a couple examples. the tenants that we're looking for are creative tenants, office tenants, but, you know, they can be technology, they can be architects. they can be

so too is mitigation, it's statutorily defined.ng the factors are the defenda defendant's history, the kind of stress she was under, and these are things that could be potentially developed by other witnesses, but there is no better witness to develop these mitigating factors than jodi arias. i don't see a downside strategically to her -- to her testifying because she has to establish these mitigating, statutorily defined mitigating circumstances. not a question of whether the jury likes her or doesn't like her. that is an unconstitutional test. she has to show mitigating circumstances and the jury has to balance it, say do the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances and there is no question that jodi arias has an uphill battle in proving these different mitigating circumstances to potentially save her life. >> i would say that's absolutely correct. because throughout this trial, she smeared travis alexander's name, the victim, and now she's telling a local fox station it was because she didn't get a plea de

what about the mitigation of her life? what does this woman have to offer to ask this jury, please don't kill me? >> reporter: you know, there is really a lot of things. there are statutory aggravators by law and then there is everything else. i think no. 1 for the defense is she has no criminal record. i think that's going to be no. 1. no. 2, she has been a good prisoner. there are a couple of things where she's hidden pens and had violations in jail. she has been out and out a model prisoner, i believe. also, there is the aspect of good character. now, when we listen and look at the testimony, we know that she went and she sang the "star spankled banner" at an event. we know she was interested if photography and starting her business of wedding photography. we know she also brought food to an exboyfriend who didn't have the money to get it. i think the defense will bring this in. what about travis alexander's behavior? we'll see if the defense goes there, the victim's behavior, how he was towards jodi, impacted her, was

are obligated to sell the parcel to construct the boulevard as well as create other projects to mitigate the impact of the freeway on the surrounding neighborhood thaha complete are in front of you in this chart, and these projects were performed and prioritized by the transportation khor which conducted a process with the central freeway committee which began in 2004, and in 2006, they prioritized these prtsand the cal transright-of-way improvements. which are the dog play area and skate park are among the remaining projects to be complete. through the process of 16 meetings in 2007 to 2013, the community with the city staff and these cal transright-of-way improvements in to the proposed dog run and skate park uses. to orient you to the area, market street is running along the top left corner of the map. and the middle lot is the west is soma dog play area and the skate park is in the lower right corner. so on the left of the screen, you have the dog park improvements. half of the lot will be operated by the partnt of real estate to park the city cars and the other half of the lot, the

>> well, i've been told i don't have any mitigating factors. >> by who?. >> said to you there are no mitigating factors for you in terms of arguing against the death penalty? >> nothing that is what you typically see in a case like this. i said years ago that i would rather get death than life and that still is true today. i believe death is the ultimate freedom. so i would rather just have my freedom as soon as i can get it. >> it's pretty extreme statement jodi arias saying she'd rather die than spend life in prison. of course, it's not up to her. let's talk a bit more about this final phase in the case, the penalty phase. i'm joined by paul callan, a cnn legal analyst. paul, they've just resumed their deliberations there. it's not often if ever you aren't sure if the defendant will beg for her life or for death. what's your take? >> well, it's highly unprecedented although we have to think back to gary gilmore in 1977. i don't know if you remember that one, wolf, but he was convicted in utah of multiple homicide. and he wanted to be killed by the firin