mr. miguel you know that from ardello to the beach, you're not going to find 144 parking spaces at night. it doesn't happen. so i met with the project sponsor and the legal counsel of the project sponsor tonight said to me, we agree to nothing at that 2006 meeting. we agreed to nothing. he kicked me in the teeth and he kicked your predecessors on the planning commission that changed that -- that required that 95 parking spaces, that was a requirement then and it should continue to be a requirement now. our neighborhoods met with the project sponsor and we agreed that they could -- we would agree that any time they have a conference with 50 people or more in that 5,000 square feet conference center, i think more than 100 people can fit there, but let's not go into that. we agreed that any time, not between the hours of 8:00 and 5:00, our neighbors come home every night and they're looking for parking places every night. i know the situation in the neighborhood. don't listen to environmental reports and don't listen to a lawyer that kicked me and you right in the teeth. so what i -- what i

mr. miguel, did you call emil lawrence? president miguel: emil lawrence. >> my name is emil lawrence. good afternoon. i've been a resident in san francisco county for 41 years now. two and a half years ago, i had a problem with a tenant or landlord that did 15 abatements on asbestos without filing any proper permits. president miguel: excuse me, sir, are you commenting on this agenda item? >> am i what, sir? president miguel: we are on a particular agenda item. >> this is connected with the fairmont is what i understand. president miguel: is it. >> yes, sir, i will bring it in line. on 52-unit building i understood you could do asbestos abasements without any proper permits and violation of federal laws under osha, asbestos is a deadly, deadly flake that you can't see, you can't taste, but you can breathe and once it gets into your lungs, it stays there until you die. if you look at the fairmont in terms of the tons of asbestos, i have seen no environmental report how that would be contained when san francisco has only one air quality man for the whole city. it's a major problem. i am

president miguel: mr. stacy, could you give us some advice on that? >> the planning commission has determined not to certify the eir. whatever the shortcomings on m the eir, the commission is going to address those. i think at this point, going through the list of issues, getting ready to prepare those changes to the eir, it could certainly continue this item, but at this point it seems that the failure of decertification is that the eir -- the commission has found that by not certifying that the eir need some additional information and corrections, it is attempting to address that. >> if i could, i think i and understand what ms. stacey just said, but what ms. duffy was saying was not to reconsider the eir in a week, but to reconsider the postponement in a week, not to put the eir up to a new vote but to be able to answer some of the legal questions about how to proceed. president miguel: if i might, the city attorney has already applied on the issue. i do not know what we need to have another week to have the attorneys. >> let me say something. i ne

president miguel: supervisor camps, thank you for coming. supervisor campos: thank you, mr. president and commissioners. i like to underscore the importance of giving clarity on the issue that was raised before, because you have the medical cannabis community that needs to have that clarity. for many of us who have worked with this group, it is difficult for us to understand how that can be classified as as an mcd. i think the sooner we address that, the better it is for the city. that said, amid talk about why we are here, which is this piece of legislation that we introduced a few weeks back. let me say i have been involved in legislation, drafting legislation the last two years, and i am very proud of the fact that the way we have been working on this piece of legislation is unprecedented, and the terms of the level of involvement that we have had, in terms of the stake holders on this issue. from the very beginning, before we even started thinking about drafting this legislation that called for the creation of the health services master plan, we made a point of sitting d

miguel: commissioner martinez? commissioner martinez: i also want to address something that mrs. jackson said, which upon reflection i realize maybe there's a misunderstanding about the historic district. every historic district is different. and every historic district has a different set of rules about what you can and can't do. and that set of rules is put together when you're establishing the district. and so the formulation of the rules is part of the public process that happens when you decide to do the districts. so the public will have full input on what the rules really are. and if the rules in the district say whatever your fence is, it's fine, nobody will bother you about the chain linked fence. some districts he -- districts -- the cottage row, the people changed the fentions and the people were very -- fences and the people were very upset. so we had to change the district to include fences because people were very upset that there was a tradition of no fences and some people started to put up really big fences. but that wouldn't have happened without the people in t

miguel: thank you. >> i am jackie mclandrige, also speaking on behalf of my husband's death. i want to thank mr. antonini for attending our meeting the other day. he was very hopeful in facilitating hopefully a great step moving forward. i just want to say on behalf of my husband and myself we are extremely excited about 777 valencia. we think it is going to be a great addition to the neighborhood. that being said, with the agreed conditions as stated, including the conditions agreed upon by mr. knowles, which we are very grateful for, as well as the hours he agreed upon the other evening, as well as ms. jackson's proposed review. i share support as part of the valencia neighborhood association and the hoa, hopefully adding a second 12 months hearing to review concerns including quality of life, security plan implementation, noise mitigation, and hours of operation. we hope to live as one in the neighborhood. but my husband's and my bedroom window is a stone's throw away from the outdoor facility. we hope everything will go according to plan and that we will not need that. but we do ask that it

mr. president, and members. thank you for having this hearing today. and i want to approach this and even go further with supervisor campos' and -- president miguel: your name, please. >> i forgot. roma guy, former health care commissioner and supporter of this ordinance and have been involved in the process. i apologize for that part. and i want to say that i do believe you and supervisor campos have been very open and we need to work further for a collaboration and not a hire hierarchy and to have other commissioners across the street with the proposal that has involved that data that we look at differently but need to look at together to come to some consensus about the health care needs of san francisco at least through the first phase of health care reform and maybe others. and so if not when, when? and when is around. and going on and i do think those who are so critical that this timing is inappropriate and we need to be nimble and do systemic planning that does allow for nimbleness, innovation, and creativity and to be open and accountable for elected and appointed public policy people. and we have a history of weakness in that area. we have a

miguel: thank you. is there additional public comment on this item? if not, public comment is closed. vice president olague: i would like to hear mr. lao and department staff respond to the comments we have heard. >> i respectfully ask that you simply look at what is actually contained in the legislation we put before you and not, frankly, fear-driven assertions about what may be in there. this is largely a technical effort that does not change the amount of money collected from the community fund. nothing is at risk here. we have not made assertions about projects that should not be supported with the moneys collected by this community impact fund. we have introduced levels of flexibility and increased the number of options that sponsors would have in meeting their obligations under the fund by not tying it into a citywide process which you have now established in other parts of the city. there is nothing in the current legislation or the proposed modifications that would prevent the building of a community center. there is nothing that says community centers would out be appropriate. there is still a guaranteed credit we have lef

mr. bloch accurately, to take all of the character-defining features of the tonga room and relocate them to another location which will then have a tonga room restaurant. president miguel: thank you. i just wanted to clarify that point because it is in the eir. commissioner antonini: sorry. i think the environmental impact report, which as we know is a combination of the draft eir comments and responses, in my opinion is accurate and objective, but i would like to talk to a few points that were brought up. the first point i guess is that there were a number of speakers who asked for analysis of other alternatives. but my understanding of ceqa law is you do not have to evaluate every alternative, and those which are unfeasible do not need to be analyzed. i think that restoration is a good idea but probably was not feasible in 1961 when they built the podium and tower. it is even less feasible now, so i do not think that has to be included in the eir. they did analyze alternatives regarding the parking, location of the ball room, the tonga room. there is even an analysis that keeps it at its present location. i am satisfied with the alternatives presented as possibility.