the e.i.r. carefully evaluates the various impacts including potential historic resources, open space and recreational resources, traffic impact as well as views and esthetics. it's a thorough and complete document. the plan reviews and presents the advantages of the preferred plan which replaces a parking lot with a new library branch, plaza and unified park adding an additional 12,000 square feet of open space in a highly dense, high open space neighborhood. north beach chinatown residents only have about half an acre pr thousand residents as compared to the rest of the city, which has about nine acres of open space per thousand residents, a significant gap. when you add that to the fact there are no other backyards in north beach and chinatown, you can understand why this neighborhood has been clearly designated in the recreation and open element of the plan as a high-needs area for acquisition of new open space and the addition of open space. i'm really here tonight i think to make that parti

the e.i.r. and the preferred alternative. so with that, i thank you very much. president miguel: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is alan martinez and i am speaking for the historic presidentration commission. as you may or may not know, we reviewed this yesterday so i don't have comments that i can give to you that are written out but i will be commenting from my notes of what the different commissioners had in mind yesterday. there was a general consensus on all of these points. i think the main one is that people felt that although the preservation alternative that was picked as superior was a good preservation alternative but that actually -- the superior preservation alternative is the addition to the north because as commissioner hoss pointed out, functionally shaped buildings can difficult to work with and a straight addition to the north is going to be a much more easier building to run. additionally, the two main reasons for not choosing that as the preservation alterna

please support the e.i.r. and make our involvement worth while and meaningful -- wort while and meaningful. thank you. president miguel: thank you is there additional public comment on this item? >> good evening, commissioners. i'm a planner with the planning division of the recreation and parks department. and i just want to add my comments to the comments you heard earlier from the department. one of the things and i'm pleased about the e.i.r. is it studies the potential historic impacts, open space and recreational resources, traffic impacts, views and aesthetics. the site is a very complicated project but i'm very pleased that the e.i.r. which took a long time to put together, the planning department did a very good and thorough job, in my opinion. again, you know, the north beach chinatown neighborhood lacks open space. that's one of the really important things about this plan. and i just wanted to mention one of the things that people are referring to. there was a two-month, six weeks or two months, i don

as the draft e.i.r. points out, the existing library is inadequate and insufficient to serve the needs of the community. north beach families deserve a state-of-the-art facilities with separate spaces for children, teens and adults, more computers, access for all, improved by supervision, children's early learning features and space for library and community programs. they also deserve a library and park that is safe, inviting and makes the best use of our limited civic resources. thank you. president miguel: thank you. terry. leo. >> commissioners, my name is terry. and i've been a resident of north beach for about six years now. before that i lived all over the world. i find that the e.i.r. is very complete. i think the study was very thorough. i think the transportation study was especially well done. and found no problems and no impact. something that we haven't touched much on tonight is a safety issue. i'm a medical health care provider and i deal a lot with seniors. the way the project would sit wi

the e.i.r. finds the demolition of the branch would be an adverse physical impact. the e.i. also finds that the existing branch contributes to an historic district or in this case multiple property listing. the branches, the fifth of eight libraries constructed by the firm of appleton and wolf during the period of significance. the e.i.r. considers the loss of this contributor a significant impact on the multiple property district. staff held a public hearing at the historic preservation commission yesterday and the commission had a number of comments on the draft e.i.r. the h.p.c. agreed to submit a letter to the environmental review office capturing the comments. in addition, the h.p.c. also decided to have one of its members represent them this evening before the commission to provide a summary of their comments. i believe that was commissioner martinez and i don't know if he's still here. in addition to historic resources, the e.i.r. also analyzes the mast are plan, plan use recreation, esthe

the draft e.i.r. is published march 2nd 2010, there are three public comments, the first was in hillsboro, april 6th, the second was in san francisco before historic preservation commission, and the third april 8th, 2010. the document was published on december 22nd 2010, and includes transcripts of the draft e.i.r. hearing. commissioners, i would like to note that the comments and responses document introduced and analyzed a variance which included water rereeced from lower crystal springs dam to san mateo creek, regarding concerns, regarding this bill which has all the same proponents of the project. the traffic variance would improve environmental conditions, in the creek and would not result in any new environmental impacts, nor would it increase the severity and no new mitigation measures are associated with this variance. subject to the publication of the comments and responses document, an errata sheet was prepared to correct an editorial oversight related to the adoption of air quality documents

that is something that will be analyzed in the e.i.r. that is not our subject for today, but it certainly is important to know and it will be discussed, the seismic concerns with the towers and the footing and the things that occur because i think the towers are meant to be preserved. so i'm sure that's not a subject for today. in terms of a would like to see -- and initiation is what it is. it means it's a beginning. it doesn't mean that you're obliged to do anything after that other than to begin the process. if some commissioners would like to have some hearings along the way and the timetable has to be moved a little bit back in time as to what's projected, that's always an option and, of course, the commission always makes a decision as to when the decision process is going to occur. so there is no reason why we cannot if we are not satisfied with what has been presented. but i think it's important to initiate today to begin moving forward. a couple of other things i think people talked a little bit about the project itself and the t

final certification of the e.i.r. is not required prior to initiation. commissioner moore: thank you. i was interested in some of the disclosure aspect critical issues in the e.i.r. which in that sense would foreclose initiate planning zoning map when i know a plan changes because it is not feasible. that is another issue. i would put in support of what the previous speaker said to the awkward position we are in relative to state and case law. that is indeed the hawkins act which we have gone over a number of times coupled with what palmer and embassy and los angeles have presented us with. so there will be no development agreement or anything the city can do to override difficulties unless we or staff starts to engage experts to see what state law can do or state law can change relative to those guarantees. i ask that staff consult with experts to take this issue forward and provide guarantees which allow us to look at this project with the responsibility we have as city planning commissioners. generally i would say that the project, and i have said it b

vice president olague: or certify -- clerk: yes, certify the e.i.r., for the motion for item number 9 -- [ roll call ] clerk: thank you. that item has been approved. mr. president, are you wanting to take items 6, 7 and 8 now? president miguel: why don't we take them at the beginning of the regular calendar. clerk: ok. thank you. commissioners with that, you are now, then, on commissioners questions and matters, item number 10. president miguel: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i was happy to see in the president the idea of using abandoned city properties as residential dwelling units for teachers and other public employees, and i think that's a wonderful idea. however, i think it doesn't go far enough, and i have always been an advocate for a system to help us address our middle class residents, particularly those who are critical for the operation of san francisco, most notably public safety officials and others whose presence is essentially. i would like to see a system where we would perhaps have an available bonus for these people and that money would have to be app

i was told the e.i.r. responses were going to be available next week, because they had to go to the commission at the 21st and to the extent they were in the office, i thought the hearing was the 21st, there are community meetings, and there is participation that is meaningful. of all of the projects, and all of the things you need, you need to have legal documents out for circulation by not only mr. olmerberg and the people that spoke here, but the attorneys they use. i am not one of the attorneys on rent issues. they had their attorneys, you cannot just drop a complex legal document on people, two weeks before the hearing and say that is sufficient. i am telling you, you can't do that. that's not fair, unless it is a charade that you are going to just rubber stamp the project. same with the complicated issue on design and transportation. i am glad mr. rahaim has had interdepthal meetings, but those haven't been meetings that the public is invited to and has all the information. you are going to get to dis

the court of appeals decision that led to the e.i.r. recognized that the word respect is a downfrayed from language calling for maintaining neighborhood character. the calling for a neighborhood liberal initiative should state that it would not support ballot initiatives because the planning department should not engage in political activity related to ballot initiatives. in addition this draft is incomplete and it lacks the work programs, the section where the work programs are supposed to appear as blank. that is supposed to indicate the area slated for development. in this regard, for a letter dated by september 9th, the state department housing and community development which reviewed this june 2010 draft has -- demanded further information and stated that this draft is not yet adequate. and specifically, they stated that -- while the element and attachment d 3 lists sites by parcel number and site zone and capacity, it should list sites by plan area or other designations guiding zoning implementation and development. attach. d 3 was

and taking a look at the large e.i.r.'s that have been done by the department in recent times, all together possible that that will be challenged and appealed and may end up actually having legal action taken against it. and we have the concept in my mind with an overall sign. and just judging from the large studies we have seen before. the comment from the department as to funding has to be a very serious consideration with everything we do in this regard. >> thank you again. and thank you to the members of the public for their comments. i think that we will learn something and everything that was brought forward and we have thought very carefully about this issue and in the original pbl when we first drafted the legislation, we were thinking about creating a fee that would be applied to the institutions and after discussions with a number of individuals including the advice of the health care for the city we decided not to include that because we heard a number of concerns about the financial impact that would have and w

i also like to say that prozac members agreed to send comments for the e.i.r. scoping about the park p.u. crifment project to me and be forwarded to the planning department and the p.u.c. by october 18th which is the deadline. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner harrison. >> may i ask a question. you mentioned you had staff out there that gave you a report on the outreach program. did they give you any information regarding that? >> there was -- there was a presentation at the meeting. >> no paperwork? >> there was paperwork delivered to us at the meeting. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment under the general manager's report? >> my name is chris. i'll be brief. speaking to public rest rooms at the park, we have a couple of rest rooms that have been placed next to the shakespeare garden. i sent a note to her and she said it would be looked into. . they're still there, so there must be some permanent placement. could they be serviced because they're smelling up the area around the academy right now. >> thank you. >> any other public

we have the november 18 e.i.r. approval and i certainly hope that this commission will not approve such a development and such a complete disregard to human beings and their needs. thank you very much. president miguel: thank you. >> hi, my name is john and i own the parkmerced shopping center in parkmerced. i think the project is doable, but as a small owner of a small shopping center that has been there for 60 years, my certain is that we're able to co-exist and that we are able to survive with parkmerced. i think they're making the effort, but i just want to make sure that they include us with their plans. thank you. president miguel: thank you. aaron goodman, dennis norgton -- >> my name is dennis norrington, i'm the longest tenant in parkmerced. i have addressed the planning commission before. i lived in parkmerced for 64 years, 53 at my current address. i want to speak today to two points that i think are important and should be included in the plan which are currently not part of it. first of all, is that th

create predictability in that process for those who don't have tools and you remarked on that during the e.i.r. hearing and without being able to analyze the land use proposals that have been sent from the perspective and other ramifications. and you all have a housing element and have a general plan that does not address the issues we are talking about. to understand the implications of the projects on a wholistic basis that impacts everybody in san francisco and make sure there is equity and access to health care with the plan that is in place for there to be predictability and to streamline the process. and the concept there needs to be an amendment and with the process that seems 180 degrees from the intent and with the legislation that is streamlined because you would have a tool to be able to evaluate the land use proposals. president miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. first of all, i want to thank you supervisor campos for the job of the health care master plan. however, we have 1500 health care employees and workers and not 800 and we are talking about thousands and 9

at the tuesday appeal hearing the board did uphold the e.i.r. with a 7-4 vote. before then, it was 1268 grant avenue. this commission granted the c.e.u. august 5th. the conditional use authorization was for other entertainment to install a karaoke machine on the first floor. new information was presented to the department about former restrictions placed on the property by the board of appeals. in a notice of special restrictions in 2005. the department staff did a site visit and found that the property had illegally expanded the bar use to the second floor without benefit of permit. as such the department recommended the board uphold the appeal and return the ceu so the owner can address the violations. the board voted to overturn the appeal. and lastly, 795 forester, the project related to this was heard by the planning commission as part of a d.r. hearing on

there's historic context here that is not referenced in the e.i.r. document. i would ask you to take discretionary review and lower the building and consider the neighborhood's and its contents. >> there are additional speakers that say -- favor the dish d.r.? >> i live behind the proposed project in a hot a couple of lots removed from it, i opened the building for 39 years. my only previous experience with -- with planning and construction was when i -- i realized my -- my little landing out in my -- my back door on second floor needed some repair, had to replace floor boards. and the railing and some stair treads. in the process, i thought it would be an opportunity to expand the -- the width of the little landing enough to put a chair in. i added 14 inches to it. but i didn't take into consideration the impact that little -- that addition would have on my neighbor who -- protested. for the next 18 months, i was producing drawings, detailing exactly the extent of the addition i had put on. and also a set of traugs showing the -- the original dimensions. and p

discussion, but i just -- the planning commission is actually currently hearing public comment on the e.i.r. literally as we speak. we'll keep you posted -- as things develop. public meetings. a public meeting will be held this saturday from noon to 1:00 to solicit support for the tennis complex. this is an exciting opportunity for one of the city's -- for a pro shop tennis less operation at the tennis complex. a request for proposals is scheduled to go before the rec and park commission on october 21st. another public meeting at the visitation valley clubhouse, next thursday october 14th at 6:00, our department will host a meeting to discuss the agency strategy to keep our city's clubhouses activated in the face of current budget challenges. ultimately we're hoping to issue a request for proposals seekaling neighborhood groups to occupy clubhouses and offer programming to adults and youth of all ages. the clubhouses that will be top tick of discussion will be the valley and lewis sutter and kiouga. scare grove. on october 22nd from 4:00 until 9:00 p.m., our department in partnership with t