the park. next slide, please. here is the system we hope to use. we have about 5 feet between the top of the garage and the surface of the plaza. what we are trying to do is use these on long slots of a church with a pervious cover on top so that the water can come off of this stone up part, and the water will come off of the stone and pour in and water the trees. that water will then be collected down below after it has gone through the trees. second to the center part, maybe you could point that out, which will become tanks. that water can be held until july and august and used for irrigation. we would reduce not only the amount of portable water off the city system, but also not discharge as much waste water. we would use it at least one season, maybe if the water quality is good enough, several seasons before we let it go. the benches are a form of the bench that have been presented to you as part of the park. these try to take the vocabulary from the park, the trees and the pavement and the

parking for the public and residents of the project will be provided in a parking garage on three levels below the proposed buildings that form the project southern edge. the proposed parking garage would include up to 389 spaces, including up to two her 55 public spaces to serve the very building area, on-site retail, and health club uses, and up to 127 spaces for residents. of the 255 public spaces, a maximum of 175 spaces will be reserved to serve the ferry building area, achieving a long- term solution to parking needs of the ferry building and other businesses in the area, as well as the central park and location for visitors to the northeastern waterfront. parking garage improve the visual quality of the waterfront area by locating underground all of the currently existing spaces on the surface of seawall lot 351. burke furthermore, the completion of the project -- after completion of the project -- excuse me. up to two years following the sale of the last residential condominium, the port will have the right to purchase a portion of the public parking garage, accommodating the les

who value the beautiful park. the problem is the eir. it has set up a false sense of choice is because it has rejected all possible alternatives. let me point out to you that the beach chalet are 7.2 acres and will cost $11.4 million to construct. eight blocks to the south, there is west sunset playground, 9.2 acres. it is scheduled to be on the 2012 bonds for financing, $13.2 million to put in grass soccer fields. why not just swap the two locations, and give the kids their soccer, and protect the park, it is a win-win solution. it does not cost any more money. it gives almost the same albers of play. everybody is happy -- same hours of play. everybody is happy. please consider that. the current eir is deeply flawed because the goals are engineered to be so narrow that they force you into a false choice. a false argument that we do not have to have. it is a tragedy. thank you very much. >> good evening. i am an environmental lawyer. i filed this comment letter. i am representing the sierra club, the audubon societ

the park boundary remains the same as identified in the preferred plan. the new 19th street is a pile- supported structure that provides a little bit of focus. and sea level rise is accommodated by maintaining the site where it is accepting the condition that as c level rises, the site will be inundated at certain times -- as the sea level rises, the site will be in a bid at certain times of year. it will allow interpretation and evolution of the sites rather than just looking at what exists today from world war ii. it looks at the history of the site and how it was built and used overtime and how they rearrange themselves and are reconfigured between the various war efforts and shipbuilding efforts. the historic uses that to replace -- that took place were on the water's edge again. access to the site would be accommodated by an expanded entrance along terry franÇois boulevard as part of an existing access point for the restaurant operation as well as expanded -- an expanded area along illinois. 19th street would be brought up rather than piles supported

park. grandview is one of the first parks to have worked on the trails of restoration part of the park spawned. the community process was seriously flawed. the park neighbors were never contacted, the neighborhood association, when rec and park was developing the plans. they did contact the advocacy groups. ironically, it resulted in the closure of the only trail that accessed the park from the north and west. in addition, they did wholesale habitat conversion in places that were not close to any trail, removing plants that held the sand in place to put in a new butterfly habitat. it is hard to see how this was part of a 12 restoration. it was similar to the habitat conversion called for in the management plan for grandview. it is now a fait accompli in those parts of a grand view. whether the sand will drift remains to be seen. there were similar plantings in some of the other parks. rec and park has used money set aside for trail restoration for the management plan, even before it is implemented. those plans are very controversial. there needs to be a lot more public comment on them. we hope

bond possible on the ballot. this park spawned is critical to the future and almost $200 million in funding for mass of capital needs, playground, pools, rec centers, irrigation systems and irrigation to port open space. as with any bond, in needs two- thirds to pass the ballot. any organized opposition could be a threat to a bond. today i am offering an amendment to continue to build support for the bond relating to a very small aspect of the bond, almost exactly 2% of the funding in the bond, specifically around trail money. urban trails are absolute treasures. they need a ton of work. we have seen amazing work by the recreation and parks department as well as thousands of volunteers. in my district we seen the great work of billy goat hill, one of his deatbiemuena vista. my hat goes off to all of those volunteers in the community that have improved these trails and system. i am offering an amendment to approve the border% contained in the proposed bond in a way that builds the most support for the bond. unfortunately th

the golden gate park master plan is the constitution of the park. it took 10 years of citizen input to create. the master plan must be followed. the eir acknowledges this. let us take a look at the master plan items. the demands for recreation need to be balanced with the objectives of preserving the of original intent of the park as a pastoral retreat. historically, signs have been kept to a minimum, because the conflict with the pastoral nature of the landscape. somehow, signs are a problem, but 7 acres of dead, plastic turf that is toxic is ok. the absurd. lighting is for safety purposes and is not intended to increase might use. that kills the whole thing. how does the eir handle that? they do not mention it. they realize that sentence would kill it. it shows you what a fraudulent eir this is. there is a nice section on the bottom of page 100 of the eir. it describes the existing lighting system of the park as a acquitted and in need of replacement. why did they put that in there? might as well put in 60 foot towers with lights. president buell:

because of the last park bond, we had a great trail that will start in august. it will go right through the open woodlands of. coca-cola came up with a leveraged $500,000 to add landscape and habitat to the borders of this trail. we are in the middle of restoring the historic horseshoe cords, and we were already gathering money to add more habitat restoration and landscaped enhancement through we're really happy with the last bond and resources that came through for that. we're looking forward to more of the same kind of thing, and i want to thank supervisor wiener for putting up with our big flurry yesterday in the past few days. i appreciate that. i support the bond. as the amendment says. the natural areas management plan will be discussed later. i hope it will be supported by everybody. thank you. >> i just got a number of speaker cards. ms. stevens. robert bakewell. anita bowman. jeane mckenny. felicia ziser. >> any miss sally stevens and today i am speaking on behalf of the sentences go forest alliance. i want to thank supervisor wiener for his ability to f

connects directly to the park. there is a very generous bridge, canopy, weather- protected canopy and the retail level out to the park itself. you can see the bus bombing in the foreground. if you back off of it and look from adjacent buildings back towards the tower, you can see the park in the foreground. the tower is very beautiful object intended to be timeless, simple in form, but i should say we are continuing to refine it. we're working with the planning staff to look at other ideas that might make it more interesting, particularly at the top. we will be pleased to show you those as they develop. as has already been mentioned, the tower is 1,070 feet. still very tall. no getting around that. it is proportioned so that it can be very carefully protected. we're quite satisfied itself retains all of the central ingredient of the previous 1,200 foot tower. next. this is the street plan that he showed you a few minutes ago. this is significant refinement and improvement in the plans. we have three designed the str

, especially in the excelsior, to renovate the park and the excelsior, where it was needed. i think was very innovative. it was a very strong commitment that they developed, renovated that part, and committed a gardener to maintain it, which is great for us. so, to me, this is a little trouble some. the other, as commissioner moore has so clearly stated, there is so much we do not know about the potentially incurious toxic nature of the fields. in fact, i have many family members who are associated with this to have a lot to say about this subject. they deal with lead, asbestos, and a lot of these elements that are harmful to people, and they are very concerned that i would be voting about -- the fact that i would be voting to support something -- i mean, to support a synthetic turf field. i mean, i have been under a lot of pressure, needless to say, from my family to really think long and hard about this. the other thing is that not much has been said that -- and i really don't have as much information as i would like to have -- about

this is the most perfect functioning model park. those of you who have guaranteed -- to a volunteered, give yourself a hand. we are here to cut a ribbon on the newest element, this incredible playground. one of of every three children in southern california suffers from a be city. our children spend nearly every hour a day behind a screen. we are giving some of our older kids a better chance to get outside, make healthier choice is to play. -- choices to play. [applause] today, we celebrate more than our older kids. we also celebrate the park alliance. the parks department cannot do it alone anymore. we need friends and partners. the president of its board is here someplace -- [applause] meredith thomas. thank you for all that you do and for your support. [applause] and today, we are also celebrating community. folks like peter cohen, doug wu -- you guys are -- where are you, peter? you guys are tenacious. we could not do it without partners. thank you so much. [applause] lastly, and i know the guy i am going to introduce is going to

the question about parking. ere has been a lot made about the fact your department has asked for a 400% increase in residential parking. when i do the math between what you are contractually doing and at the parking ratios, we could move forward with a parking rise that is smaller than what we have today. one example is we could take off one level of parking, one-third of the parking that exists there given this is supposed to be one of the transit-richest neighborhoods in the city. also we know that parking is not a money maker for the developer. it's typical parking spot costs 100 tricky thousand dollars per spot. this is not a place where it is in the interests of the developer to see parking year. can you explain why you feel a need to have the parking garage that is the size? i know you make assumptions in here about what you are contractually provided to -- that you provide to the ferry building but they will sue the city over the issue and regardless of the parking signs, if there needs will not be satisfi

we made the park to serve the needs of the city. as i think the speakers have shown tonight, the needs of the city are for soccer fields. finally, i am a city kid myself and my daughter is a city kid. she wanted to go to practice and i told her, the boss is right -- the bus is down there. beach chalet is one of the asiest places to get to. it is a part of our overall -- i think that is a significant factor. i think the commissioners for their amazing patience and i support the project. president fong: thank you. >> i am a 33-year resident of the city and a father of three. this controversy is not about a dangerous chemicals and turf. if it were, i trust the opponents of this project would be supporting and protecting the health of thousands of players on the other fields. this is about money. this is about the city of san francisco, which is facing deficits, providing the most hours of recreational play with in its financial means. with that consideration, there is no alternative to approving this eir and going ahead with this proje

i support the parks bond because it is necessary to maintain san francisco parks in order to fulfill space needs for the residents. the state of disrare that many of the parks fall into is a testament to their heavy use. restoration is required for the continued quality for both san francisco residents and visitors. thank you. >> thank you. thanks for coming. next speaker. >> i have some slides. >> i'm a frequent user of the natural area, mcglarne, glenn canyon, sharp park, spring grove. and i just want to talk about why it's so important to address the national areas program as part of looking at the bond. the 2004 assessment showed that people used the walking trails and biking trails as the most used facility and the most important to them. as well as when you look at what the voters or the residents have said is the most important thing for improving in the parks, that's the walking trails and being able to visit nature, which is just exactly the opposite of what the natural area program is doing. so if you actually -- so there's another slide. so if you actually go to the natura

currently the parking lot hosts about 50 parking stalls. it's an irregular shaped parking space and as i mentioned kind of in insafe condition. a lot of users come, drop kids off and let them practice and pick them up. there's not a formal pickup and drop-off zone, which we are proposing. there is a new pathway from j.f.k. we're going to expand the parking lot by 20 stalls. it will also share four new a.d.a. parking stalls and at the south end of the parking lot will be the new storage structure for the operations staff. so i wanted to talk briefly -- that's the overview of some of the elements of the project. i wanted to talk briefly about the golden gate master plan. i know neil mentioned it briefly as part of the general plan review process but i wanted to point out that the department recognizes that goaltender -- golden gate park is separated into to distinct sections, the east end, the more developed area and the west end is more sylvan and pastoralnd we recognize that and respect that and try for that goal. but if you look deeper int

i'm the president of friends of mclaren park. it is one of the oldest neighborhood community park groups in san francisco. i give a lot of tours through the park. during those tours, a lot of the folks in the group will think of the park as very scary. it has a lot of hills, there's a lot of dense groves. once you get towards the center of the park you really lose your orientation. you are very much in a remote area. there are a lot of trees that shield your view from the urban setting. you would simply see different groves that gives you a sense of freedom, of being outdoors, not being burdened by the worries of city life. john mclaren had said that golden gate park was too far away. he proposed that we have a park in the south end of the city. the campaign slogan was, people need this open space. one of the things that had to open is there were a lot of people who did a homestead here, about 25 different families. their property had to be bought up. so it took from 1928 to 1957 to buy up all the parcels of land that ended up in

the golden gate park facility should be made accessible to all users. one of the key elements of this proposed project is to make open spaces accessible to people of all means and abilities and to increase accessibility, which is consistent to the general plan. finally, the golden gate park master plan, while not in the general plan, there is an outline suggesting what should be in the plan, and that outline does provide conflicting policy direction for facilities such as the soccer fields. again, within the golden gate park subsection, the outline suggests that we should have recreational facilities, the recreational facilities are considered essential resources in golden gate park, and it emphasizes the role of recreational facilities. at the same time, it emphasizes that the naturalistic landscapes should be protected and renewed within the bounds of its character. it also states that vehicle traffic should be minimized. finally, the primary function of the part is to serve the recreational needs of all san franciscans. the implications include that t

i'm here to speak a little bit about the two parks. obviously muni levy ward isn't what we're talking about today but as a former captain of bay view and can tell you what it did for silver terrace and garfield in the mission and kimball playground where we actually have officers coach the kids, when the facilities renovated, it gives kids positive voice -- choices to engage in positive exist -- activity, and especially at-risk kids in the community of color. i've played on these since i was a kid. my kids played there. the police soccer team plays there. this is a fabulous location, but i have turned ankles and knees and i've seen how these kids play, again at gar field, kimball and silver terarkse whether it's junior giants -- the way that you can activate these spaces to engage young people, and if the lights have been reduced in height as they have been so it's not seen outside, there are things that have always gone on in the bushes in and around beach chalet, whether narcotics use, prostitution, a haven for auto burglars to play o

don, from the rec and park department, take it away. -- dawn, from the rec and park department, take . >> i am glad to be here to show the results of work with the port. developing a $195 million parks and open space bond proposal for the november 2012 ballot. san francisco law their parks. we have seen this over and over again in san francisco where we have been the beneficiary of bonds supported by voters in 2000 and 2008 and the renewal of the open space bond. there is clear commitment to ensuring our final network of open spaces which were deemed to be than that -- best network of open spaces in the country and continues to stay that way. we have over 20 hundred 20 parks and 400 build structures. even with the investments we received, more is required. we need to continue to make investments in the system, much of which was built in the 1950's to make sure that it will continue to function for another 50 or 100 years. we have these needs of over $1 billion worth of capital needs in the recreational park system alone. it is because of those critical capital needs and those of other

that is the impact of lights, on golden gate park. that is the lack of interpretation and respect for what the golden gate master plan has formulated as an update to re-examining the plan in a master plan as a guiding document just as we use the downtown plan to help us interpret the direction in which the city reinvents itself in its built form, the master plan for golden gate park has been devised to help us interpret and understand how to take this particular park into the future. i i do believe that the intensification of the beach chalet as proposed in this particular project, although modified to the way that it was presented today and i appreciate that, is still too intense, partially because the use of lighting from dusk until 10:00 at night, and i do believe that astroturf, for all the reasons that were described, for health and environmental reasons, is an inappropriate response to that natural setting. there are many studies. i am not sure that i can properly tied them to astroturf and the particular form that you have tied

and it is in the western end of the park. so even in midday, you are likely to be walking in thick fog. it's almost mystical out there. it's so peaceful and so quiet. you know, on the north side, there's the windmill and queen wilhamena's tulip garden and on the west side there's the beach chalet, the actual restaurant, and the park chalet where people sit out and on the other side, while there's the windmill and hopefully they'll do something about that and when the kids are there playing soccer during the day on the weekends, it's very noisy, but when they're not there, it's very quiet. and there's just loads of paths and yes, there is the odd homeless camper and there are a few odd people ducking in and out of the shrubberies but they're pretty much harmless. i've been there late at night and it's not unsafe. it's not seedy. people have been standing up here making it sounds like it was really not safe but that's not true. it's just the whole stadium lights and the expanded parking and the bleachers, it would be so out of c