with quick response type sprinkler head, close on the property line, and we will start with the requestors. you have three minutes. >> okay, good evening and thank you very much for allowing me to speak. my name is teresa votruba, i'm the building manager at the adjacent property which is 218 union street, i have here if you could take a quick look at it a copy of the assessor's information about addresses uilding at 218 union street. at 218 union these things would have been referred to you in your packet by ms. khan and i also would like to bring to your attention my e-mail address, if you can see it here, this doesn't seem to work as well as i thought it would. in the overhead, i have an e-mail address of jvotrub without the a on it at yahoo.com and if you refer to exhibits 3 and 4 in your packet, these -- >> [inaudible]. >> i want the bottom part. i didn't know it was such a small screen, alright. i only have three minutes. >> i will pause it for you. >> i would like to point to a timeline and that timeline will be referred to for about the next few minutes. december, 2009, there was a

sanchez, am i correct that the requestor's received a copy of this already? >> i sent copies to the requestors yesterday, so i think all parties have had sufficient time to review the document. >> okay. okay, we can take public comment on this item. can i see a show of hands on how many people intend to speak on this item. when you come up to speak, if you could give a speaker card, that would help in the preparation of minutes. >> three minutes. >> okay. okay, thank you, my name is john sergeant, good evening, i want to thank you for your consideration. if someone were to propose storing discarded tires in golden gate park, i think everyone would oppose that plan, and also that storage space for discarded tires was going be a play area for children, i think most definite everyone would oppose that plan. i would ask you please to consider a new hearing based on the new material in evidence. the fact that there is something demon astrally and provably shown to be toxic to humans and also to the general environment would not follow under the category of natural

with the requestor. again, there is the three minutes. >> i was absent at the original hearing and i have reviewed the video as well as reviewed the transcript. >> okay, good evening, commissioner, katherine howard, golden gate park, this is with the shore line [inaudible] while emphasizing the park's naturalistic landscape qualities, you have received a new study on toxins and recycled rubber that became available on august 22. this study concludes that because of the "presence of a high number of harmful compounds frequently at high or extremely high levels of recycled rubber materials" they should be restricted or prohibited in some cases. i have put as an exhibit here a letter we are submitting from the center from environmental health which is considered about the study and the artificial turf and would like their concerns incorporated into testimony. if the proposed sbr tire infill is deemed toxic, then installation of over 7 acres of this substance and the subsequent closing for an additional reno

approach would be to discuss the matter with me, come back to me, what i got was the neighbors, the requestors came and shouted, yelled, boarded my whole sidings, the deck is about -- just about 1/3 and my whole siding is [inaudible] feet, came and boarded with illegal material, completely blocked the four windows, three of them are not even looking at the deck, the two windows, the bathroom windows are really the only light that provide -- they are the only windows that provide light to my bathroom, my window, shouting, yelling at a 4 year-old kid, well, i think i haven't got time, but a lot of accusations and things and i personally would like to say that it's not just costing time and energy and dealing with this with a professional way and a mature way, it's also costing me health and my inability for me to perform my normal responsibilities, i request the board to deny this request. it's been way above 18 months, i've got a legal permit. >> thank you, your time is up. >> thank you. >> mr. sanchez? >> thank you. good evening, president hwang and board of appeals and planning department, so

will help, all these things we're doing will help to alleviate the existing problem that the dr requestors have broukt up. >> thank you, commissioner borden? >> yeah, i'm supportive of what's been proposed here, i was going to mention staff when there was back and forth conflicting information, walgreens, we could check -- look at that building permit and whatever was required of how they keep that property if there was -- i don't think there probably was, and in general, i know this is not the only walgreens where there are concerns about their maintenance and maybe at some further time, we should have a hearing, maybe somebody from walgreens, we could identify some of those problems, i feel for the neighbor, it's, you know, i understand the challenge that you have and it sounds like the project sponsor with the chart and all the suggestions he's made to remedy things is more than amenable to working with you and has every intent to hose down the street, to pick up the street and make things better, to the extent that we can look into walgreens and it sounds the city can work on mta to wo

, they have been to several community meetings, they have had several conversations with the dr requestors through both e-mails and phone conversations so they have been engaged with the concerns, mr. piper brings up the concern with lack of city engagement with the traffic and parking issues and at that meeting on september 13 where i was present, oedw agreed to leading a conversation with mta about the traffic calming measures that we could help to improve in the community, in addition to that, we are working with mta to increase the parking restrictions along faxon avenue to address the access and parking. with that said, this business will be an extreme addition to this community and i would very much love to see it come to the community. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, my name is howard chung, i'm the property owner of 613 faxon and i am the chair of the ocean avenue association, the cbd for the ocean avenue corridor, just a few points, i've been a property owner in the ocean avenue area for 15 years, during that time, i've seen the very slow but consistent

. >> they are communicating with the dr requestor's niece who was english speaking and i don't know if she's here right now, but that's how we were communicating with the dr requestor. >> i appreciate you explaining that, thank you. >> thank you, commissioner antonini. >> thank you, in terms of the whole parking issue, we had our dealing with the narrow street here, i believe this street was when the subdivision was ut put in probably in the 20's, it was basically residential use and i don't think if cars were parked on both sides of the street, it's essentially a one way street, one car has to wait before the other one goes at least in that little segment, so if you do reinstitute parking, it would have to be on one side because of the chance of collisions going through there and the other thing i would like to see happen is the project sponsor works with the neighborhoods and with the ocean avenue neighborhood association with staff as far as the final appearance of the building on the outside. i mean, presently, i think the existing building, i know it's being renovated and turned i

. >> i have a question for the requestor, are you familiar with the studies that eir reviewed that was submitted as part of the eir and given consideration? >> yes, i am. >> and to what extent is the study you presented distinguishable from those? >> i think that -- i don't know if -- okay, the city did an artificial turf study, it was done in the city. it was done with data from turf manufacturers, it was done -- it was kind of an in-house thing and it was not peer reviewed. we do not believe that that study would stand up under scrutiny. in fact, in the east bay, they looked at that study along with other details and data and for their eir for a project they were considering, they said there could be a significant hazard from artificial turf and they discounted it. >> which study? >> the san francisco study. >> okay. >> this is a totally new study and i do believe the data is significant. gene barish is an attorney and she has background -- >> can you help me -- >> i have to look at the study again, it's my understanding it's a study that was former comprehensive during the eir proce

she also told me that the requestor, in other words, she said she believed somebody had to request dpw to remove the tree, and dpw says that they were removing the tree at their own request, and that was never given to me. the third item that i wanted to mention is the planter, that planter, i don't know who owns that planter, and like star child pointed out, if that planter were moved, there's probably between five and a half to six feet clearance between the crack that the tree has caused in the sidewalk and the nearest house which is more than adequate ada compliance. i don't know who own that is planter, i don't know whether it's a city-owned planter, a privately-owned planter or who has that planter and she mentioned also within a reasonable time. when they came and posted the notices to remove the trees at 152 church street, one directly in frnt of the kh*urmg and one off to the left -- yes, off to the left of the church as you face church street, i called the department of public works and asked them what they were doing, they said they had to remove the trees because they were

. >> dr requestor, you have five minutes. >> my name is [inaudible], i live at 265 fax -- faxon with this one. i have a problem. >> you have to submit your letter? >> yeah. >> okay. this one is the same kind but i copied, and also, i have my neighbors, there's a copy over there. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll give the commissioners a couple of minutes to read it over. >> why don't we take the speakers that are in support of the dr. >> hi, thank you very much for your time today, i know it's been a busy day and hopefully with one more to go. the first thing i would like to say, so my name is ken piper, i live at 30 some odd feet across the street from 613 faxon. i don't want to say i'm necessarily 100% prone to dr but we have issues on our street that i would say the city has not been listening to and not been working through that we would like to see resolved. those parking issues, the speed issues of cars on the street are a big concern for us. now on -- i work in the city, my wife is a special ed city, i have three kids going to 34th and mission, we are san francisco pe

my request is to set aside this permit for removal as dpt is not responsive as to limb failures, requestors or sidewalk access, none of which they seem -- they have been able and my humble upon to uphold and provide, and that's all, thank you. >> thank you. >> ms. short? >> good evening, commissioner, carla short, department of public works, bureau of urban forestry. the tree removal was initiated by the department, although we did receive a number of requests since 2008 from the community to remove the tree. since 2008, we have inspected the tree a number of times and we have always been of the opinion that the tree was in sufficiently good condition to warrant monitoring it rather than removal. we did receive a request in january of 2012 after the tree had lost another limb to reinspektd the tree and afterthat inspection, we determined that at this point in time because of the pattern of limb failure and is because of the sidewalk damage and the narrowness of the sidewalk which makes it difficult to repair the sidewalk without having to remove some -- what we perceive to be likely structu