that is the only way we could get there. 6.2 [inaudible] traffic and unavoidable impact. today without a game the traffic is backed up every night and all most every morning at the 280. i have learned ways around the neighborhood to do that. the transit doesn't work today. we need better plans in that area if the warriors are going to come to mission day. i agree with the nurses. it is going to be a serious problem and you are trying to route traffic i believe through the minnesota street area and dogpatch neighborhood to get emergency vehicle tooz the hospital or people in trouble that need to get to the hospital . that is not a acceptable alternative. thank you >> thank you >> good afternoon commissioners my name is oscar james and i'm a native resident of bay view hunters point and a former city commissioner which this area covered. the area that you have today, you are talking about during development, we have a memerandum understanding that coming into this area hires 50 percent community residence and 35 percent contractors and minority tractors as a whole. i want t

>> really the line that is drawn in sequa is if there are significant unavoidable impact said. there is also a provision in sequa that specifically states that controversy surrounding a project is not in and of itself require a environmental impact report and there is also discussion about socio ecnocm impacks and states those are to be considered as they relate to physical environmental impacts. we have a thick book but those are some of the provisions where a negative declaration is concerned. the standard of review is whether a fair argument has been made or can be made that there is a significant unavoidable environmental impact from the project and sequa defines a fair argument as based on substantial evidence in the record of a physical impact. >> to go back to the stable description issue that i brought up the stability of the project description, maybe you can clarify this for me. i am looking at the county of [inaudible] versus city of los angeles case that stated interpreted the national environmental policy act stating a accurate stable finite project description is a

if there are significant unavoidable impacts that you cant reduce to a level of significant that is when sequa calls to prepare a report. the neg deck versus [inaudible] isn't based on project size, it is based on whether a project has significant impacts that can't be avoided. >> thank you, that is really helpful in clarifying the distinction between when we require a eir and mitigated neg deck. i am trying to remember the smaller projects the board has seen. if memory serves correctly, did we do one for booker t washington? >> yes there was a eir done for booker t washington. >> which was a fairly small building construction, i say about the size of the jail replacement rebuild. >> it makes sense to do a eir for major plans. treasure island and [inaudible] we'll do a environmental impact review. i'm trying to think of smaller projects where we have done a eir and trying to understand the distinction between booker t washington and this one. >> i don't recall the detailoffs booker t washington. i do believe-she believes the reason for the eir there was a historic resource impact. that i

that is the only way we could get there. 6.2 [inaudible] traffic and unavoidable impact. today without a game the traffic is backed up every night and all most every morning at the 280. i have learned ways around the neighborhood to do that. the transit doesn't work today. we need better plans in that area if the warriors are going to come to mission day. i agree with the nurses. it is going to be a serious problem and you are trying to route traffic i believe through the minnesota street area and dogpatch neighborhood to get emergency vehicle tooz the hospital or people in trouble that need to get to the hospital

>> really the line that is drawn in sequa is if there are significant unavoidable impact said. there is also a provision in sequa that specifically states that controversy surrounding a project is not in and of itself require a environmental impact report and there is also discussion about socio ecnocm impacks and states those are to be considered as they relate to physical environmental impacts. we have a thick book but those are some of the provisions where a negative declaration is concerned. the standard of review is whether a fair argument has been made or can be made that there is a significant unavoidable environmental impact from the project and sequa defines a fair argument as based on substantial evidence in the record of a physical impact. >> to go back to the stable description issue that i brought up the stability of the project description, maybe you can clarify this for me. i am looking at the county of [inaudible] versus city of los angeles case that stated interpreted the national environmental policy act stating a accurate stable finite project description is a

argument based on substantial evident has been made that the project would have significant unavoidable physical impacts under sequa. it is our view that's no such evidence is provided and all environmental impacts are analyzed and addressed. unlike many sequa items before the body, the sequa determination isn't the only aspect of the project. if the board is in agreement with the planning department and commission regarding the adequacy of the sequa durmt they have the opportunity to consider the approval or disapproval of the grant application. i'll turn the presentation to mr. [inaudible] to discuss the contents of the consideration. >> thank you sara. good afternoon board president breed and member thofz board. the subject of the public hearing today is the mmd for the proposed rehabilitation and detention facility at 850 bryant street. the project would demaunsh 3 buildings on site and construct a 200 thousand square foot, 110 foot tall rdf ajais tonight the existing hall of justice building. the project replaces the existing county jail facility 3 and 4 and is part of a larger program to relocate

and this will be an unavoidable issue. what's the impact on the primary process do you have think?uld say thank god we are talking about it. how can we expect our civilization to survive if we destroy the most innocent and vulnerable among us. how can we pretend we are superior to nations that commit genocide if we commit infant d infanticide. it's time to put this out there and talk about it. i know a lot of republican primary donors, they don't want to talk about it. stay away way from these issues. i say no let's talk about it in the same way we once had to deal with slavery in this country and we decided one person cannot own another person. it's immoral. for one person to take it life of another innocent person, can we not conclude that that, too be is immoral? that's what we need to be discussing. martha: and we'll no doubt in the process to come. i want to talk to you about iran. this is what the president had to say about the deal that he struck when he went on "the daily show" * yesterday. >> the deal we put together i can say that iran will not be able to get a nuclear we