president miguel: commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: for me, it is fairly clear. it does not seem unambiguous to me. we took action to unite certification. that could have stood by itself. i don't know what happens then. the project sponsor goes back in redesigns the project, does the whole eir all over, whatever happens. but then we took action to continue it. the reason i thought we were continuing it was for nea to evaluate all the kinds of things that people testified or inadequacies in the final eir, the final eir being the final comments and responses document together with the final eir. we went through that list. i listened to the tape, have those written down. i don't want to go through it. i don't know if miss hester is correct. i don't want to negotiate the alternatives that were discussed. i think it is clear what the alternatives were that were discussed by listening to the tape. i would just mention one, which was the alternative re- examining the re-use of the power itself. there were a number of issues about a whole issue of demolition and how that

commissioner sugaya: true. i think commissioner more is trying to get to one of the arguments for demolition is that the building cannot be used. the ceilings are too low. the column spacings interfere. we had one architect testified that he thought quite the opposite. it would seem as though the eir should take a look at whether or not the project sponsors supposed substantiation of demolition holds water or not.

commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: the direction of the planning commission's discussion and concerns i feel are more appropriately directed toward the historic preservation. because that's where we would be talking about issues such as historic preservation policies, historic preservation goals and objectives, and the way historic preservation in this city can be looked at by, you know, both the planning commission, i suppose, and the historic preservation commission. ultimately the board of supervisors. i think additional discussion on tweaking the ordinance will go nowhere. and would just result in delays that i think -- you know, will not be productive. that's why i voted against the continuance. i think if the commission really feels -- and i do, too, that there are matters of gentrification issues, equity issues, broadening, perhaps, the concept of historic preservation. it's a social and cultural preservation as well. and getting communities involved on that level, then i think the discussio

commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: just to follow-up on stacy's comments, my interpretation is whenever this comes back, whether a january 27 or thereafter, what we were looking for i think was to have what you might call a report. that revised eir, whatever term you want to use for it, what address all of the issues that were raised at the public hearing, including the suggestions for certain alternatives which related to the existing power -- with the existing tower. that would not be in the form of some memorandum or something that says, oh, yeah, this is such and such, but it would be what i thought would be the context of the environmental document and the way the environmental documents are set forth. i extremely concerned about. so you go back home and come back. i think procedurally, there is much more involved, and that is the expert evaluation of the building at hand. the structure of use, its ability to adapt to codes, etc. it goes on and on. there is a long list. the second thing is mor

commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: well, i'm looking forward to adding another couple hundred pages to my zoning quota here in a couple of months when i get the little pact. >> i would say i did add it up actually and there is a lot of text deleted. it does add texas, not a considerable amount because there is a lot that is deleted from other sections. >> my direction to staff to make sure that we're not unduly adding to the code. >> as long as it still fits in one binder. >> i would like to thank adam and to reflect the fact that the reason that no one is here is because there is so much agreement on this plan, so thank you for all of your great work. not that there is no one here but the three members who are clearly here for a reason, but that's ok. president miguel: commissioner moore. commissioner moore: two reasons why i strongly support all three recommendations in front of us. one, the department now exclusively prints on recycled, noticeably recycled paper and double-sided, and two, becaus

commissioner sugaya: true. i think commissioner more is trying to get to one of the arguments for demolition is that the building cannot be used. the ceilings are too low. the column spacings interfere. we had one architect testified that he thought quite the opposite. it would seem as though the eir should take a look at whether or not the project sponsors supposed substantiation of demolition holds water or not. >> would you like that to be done not only from a feasibility, but as a variant or alternative? is that what you're saying? commissioner sugaya: i think as commissioner sugaya: i think as a variant or alternative would

president miguel: commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: yeah, a couple of things. first on the corner of folsom and fifth, there are two parcels i think we just approved a project on and have we gotten -- and the other, across the alley. so it would be interesting to me if we could ask that developer what would happen if his project suddenly became subject to this particular provision 3 subject to this particular provision of increased housing. i don't know if you have already done that or not, but they seem to be fairly reasonable. i don't know, you know and it might be interesting to see as a developer who is in this area who is paying the highest tier at the moment, what their + at the moment, what their take is on this particular provision to see if they feel that it's at all within reason that they could afford to go ahead with that development or not. >> of course, i can't speak to how they feel about the higher affordability, but as commissioner olague mentioned, part of the impetus of this legislation in moving forward was that the 900 folsom project and di

commissioner sugaya. commissioner -- >> that motion fails, with moore, olague and miguel opposing. >> move to approve staff recommendations. >> second. >> commissioners oh the motion on the floor is to approve the amendment for staff recommendation. on that recommend -- motion, commissioner antonini. >> no. >> commissioner moore. commissioner moore: aye. motion fails on a 3-2 vote, commissioners antonini and sugaya voting against. commissioners would there be a recommendation for continuance? >> a motion to continue to the next hearing. the 18th. >> the hearing would be closed, commissioners, with the absent commissioner receiving and hearing the material that's been presented and participating in final action. >> correct. >> that would be to november 18. is there a second? >> second. >>en the motion for continuance to november 18, commissioner antonini? >> i just wanned to add, we would hope project sponsor in the neighborhood association could work the resolution perhaps before that ti commissioner moor

commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: this is an extremely difficult side to work with, given the freeway on one side and that hill situation, and the unknowns with the stadium rearing its continuing head, so to speak. commissioner antonini would love to have it there. anyway, it is a difficult site. to echo what commissioner moore and others have said, for me, it seems that, given that kind of isolation, we should not try to isolate it even more. some additional consideration of connections, i guess, and how it relates, especially to the east, since that seems to be the most direct connection at the moment, away from the freeway, and to encourage, i think, some additional information, as commissioner moore suggested, back to the commission would be great. commissioner moore: while we have on the east side a project that was guided by a development agreement, and has set in stone obligations that will have to be realized over a time frame, i would be interested to see how these communities, these two

commissioner sugaya. the motion passes. >> if we can take out of order -- >> item 11. >> item 11. >> you are now getting ready to consider item 11. 4575 geary boulevard. the institute on aging. >> can anyone fill in for her? >> i don't know enough about the project. >> dewpoint to take a five -- do you want to take a five-minute? >> we're taking a five-minute break. >> the planning commission is taking a five-minute recess.er, geary boulevard, the institute on aging. the proposal before you to modify a condition of approval that was approved by the planning commission and board of supersizors in 2006 this eprevious condition required that additional 28 valet parking spaces be added to the site in addition to the 67 required spaces for a total of 95 spaces. the current conditions -- it's going to be modified to be amended to say that the valet parking spaces would only be required during business hours and during large conferences or meetings that would have more than 50 people in attendance. the departmen

commissioner sugaya: so am i.. when i was in high school, which was a long time ago, i used to eat lunch in the cafeteria. there were student deejays that would spin records. they would intersperse some jazz, which was quite surprising. there would be people like shelley mann and those guys. that kind of led me into bird and davis and monk and those guys. i did not know then that the roots went all they back to new orleans in the beginning. that came later. i am kind of excited that this is happening. that said, when sf jazz was here i did make a comment, and i did e-mail mr. loesser with my comment. in trying to form a jazz district, i wish that mr. knowles had bought a building on fillmore street. and that we had this venue there to strengthen district -- the district idea. i said the same thing when sf jazz came. i thought it was unfortunate that there were four blocks away or five blocks away from fillmore and had not been able to find a location closer to that area. based on that and some of our hearings on ot

commissioner sugaya: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the secretary and member of canaan lutheran church. i'm here to make a public comment on this item on behalf of the benita hu, who is unable to come due to time conflict. aim a 12th grader at george washington high school and i have been to canaan lutheran church since eighth grade. i go to this church every saturday from 4:00 to 6:00 to learn mearge and help other students from grades four through eight in their homework. i also come to get help on my homework for school by our tutor, mr. chan, a member of canaan lutheran church. during the school time, there are many students that come to get help on their homework for school that needs to be turned in by monday. others come to get worksheets done that would greatly help them prepare for school. even during the summer, many students return to a lot of math that will surely prepare them for their n-students return to h that will surely prepare them for their next school year. my first subject was math but by going to tutor class

commissioner sugaya. commissioner -- >> that motion fails, with moore, olague and miguel opposing. >> move to approve staff recommendations. >> second. >> commissioners oh the motion on the floor is to approve the amendment for staff recommendation. on that recommend -- motion, commissioner antonini. >> no. >> commissioner moore. commissioner moore: aye. motion fails on a 3-2 vote, commissioners antonini and sugaya voting against. commissioners would there be a recommendation for continuance? >> a motion to continue to the next hearing. the 18th. >> the hearing would be closed, commissioners, with the absent commissioner receiving and hearing the material that's been presented and participating in final action. >> correct. >> that would be to november 18. is there a second? >> second. >>en the motion for continuance to november 18, commissioner antonini?

commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: thank you for that comment. that is the direction i was aiming at. i was just reminded that earlier in the day, we had a discussion about fees and that kind of thing, and whether or not this community center, that is supposedly in the middle of this thing, is going to be there or not be there. maybe it does not need to be there. maybe it can be provided further to the east. maybe not. that development, maybe this community center could supply facilities for the development further to the east. i don't know. but, i think you got the idea. commissioner moore: this is something i was not aware of. candlestick point state recreation area, at least on the furthest western part, stretching probably for two or three blocks in length, is about 10 feet above harney way. there is no physical connection between the neighborhoods and this park. i think the state park itself is very much puzzled about what to do. that is the existing physical condition. they do not know how to do it. there has to be an incredibly integrated

commissioner sugaya: yeah. i'm curious. i'm going to try to go back and try to rezone everything and figure out now in more detail why in a lot of these tier c areas are surrounding the smaller parcels in the neighborhood. i'm sure we had that discussion, but it escapes me now as to why that happened. i'm for kind of moving it ahead. i don't want to make a motion to deny, to disapprove it because i think that sends the wrong message to the supervisor and supervisors. so i think could support a motion of either continuing it even though -- or something that says that we're in support of the idea of it and that kind of sort of vague idea or whatever you want to call it, but short of out and outright denying it or disapproving it. >> commissioner, if i could, maybe i could suggest some language that you support the intensity of the youth and family zone and you seek to strengthen that as a youth and family zone, but -- oh, shoot, but that you don't feel like this articulation is the best way to strengthen the zone. you want st

commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: i would like to take item three off consent. president miguel: okay, that would be three, four, and two. ok, commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i would move for approval of item number one on consent, which is all that is left. commissioner borden: second. >> on the motion to take action only on item 1 under the consent calendar, case number 2010.0311c -- [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners. you are now under commissioners questions and matters. item 5, consideration of adoption draft minutes of regular meeting for september 2, 2010, october 7, 2010, and october 14, 2010. president miguel: commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: i was going to move on approval. commissioner antonini: second. president miguel: is there any public comment regarding acceptance of the minutes? if not, public comment is closed. >> on that motion to adopt said minutes -- [roll call vote] that motion passes, 6-0. item six, commission comments and questions. commission president miguel: eric anthony? commissioner antonini: my congratul

commissioner sugaya: can you tell me what this means? >> this is part of the concerns that were raised in the other agencies, because this was not defined. this is with the feasibility studies and we were wondering if the study would run between 5- $20,000. there is a small amount of city funding. this is one reason we recommended the modification. >> it says that after the study, with the provision of job care not being given to the working group legislation being modified, if this is not required, then why are you doing this? >> we did recommend adding -- >> this is just a political football pin it will never be landing. >> it can go up to the discretion of the decision makers, and they always did a very good job with these bodies. >> thank you very much. >> we had some questions that may have been asked already. the modifications and the staff modifications would be applied only to the city occupied projects. we will bring this up to 50,000 which is in requirements of these projects and we would vote to approve the modified projects.

president miguel: commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: as an aside, i think there is already some oewd activity with the planning department on the social, cultural heritage side of things in which paul lord has been discussing some additional planning tools for the area and oewd is also trying to work now with planning on more economic development type issues. there is already some cooperation going on with respect to this particular area. vice president olague: good stuff. interesting. >> commissioners, let me see if i understand. you are not disapproving, but you're also not approving. basically your motion is to encourage the intent of the legislation to move forward with the continued dialogue between the community and the supervisors office and the planning department. president miguel: correct. >> and other city agencies. >> and other agencies of the city. ok. and on that motion. [roll call] >> thank you. commissioners, that motion passed 4-1 with commissioner antonini voting against. commissioners, you're now

commissioner sugaya: i think i am. if it's just the inclusion of the housing requirement, that that isn't going to be enough of an incentive like a private developer, like the portland case i have just been reading, apparently portland is teamed with a private developer out of texas to build housing and so there is a partnership there. and somehow that partnership probably in san francisco versus portland may need some kind of incentive more than just removal of inclusionary. that's the direction i'm taking and encourage the staff and the supervisor to look at ways that we can provide more incentives. president miguel: commissioner olague. vice-president olague: i want to include the right to private action, the comments said before. i know he couldn't look into it and he can explain it. is that right? did i get that right -- in the event that we can't monitor. yeah. ok. and then, i think in the spirit of smart growth, which is something of encouraging -- that's why i was -- you know asked the staff to, you know, to en

president miguel: commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: i am going to wear former commissioner bill lee's hat for a moment. the traveler magazine has named san francisco the most favorite city for travel in the u.s., so -- and i just wanted to comment on commissioner moore's candlestick park. i am sure they are going to have a lot of time to come to a meeting of the minds given the state budget and the failure of prop 21. clerk: commissioners if we can move forward to director's report. >> thank you, commissioners, i actually don't have any special announcements today so ill defer to ann marie for her report. >> good afternoon commissioners, ann marie rogers here to give you a report on the activities of the board of supervisors as they pertain to planning and land use. this week there were a couple of libraries that were up for landmark designation. the first, marina branch library, constructed in 1954 by appleton and woolford, and the hpc designation on october 7th 2009, and they recommended approval on june 16th of

president miguel: commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: just to go back to the continuance, i did not vote for the continuance without anything happening in the interim. it to me, it is clear the continuance, the way i've voted for it, was to have, as i have said a couple times before, to have them look at those issues that were being raised at the hearing by people who testified and also commissioners' comments and other materials that were submitted. i don't think at the end of a couple of months, when it comes back in january, if we're just going to reconsider the same document, that was not the purpose of voting for the continuance, at least from my standpoint. my vote on the continuance had nothing to do with whether there would be a full commission or not. secretary avery: thank you, commissioner sugaya. my take on it was so very different, and i will go back and review the tapes and provide all of you with a transcript so we can be clear on what to put. i could be totally wrong, and i would be willing to admit i

commissioner sugaya: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. >> it passes unanimously. you are now on item number 17. the streetscape plan. >> the evening, commissioners. we came here before you one month ago to display the final draft document of the plan. as you might remember, it is a comprehensive strategy so that it provides public space. [unintelligible] these workshops were instrumental in the creation of a plan for the project design. what you might remember after some of them last month, the plan has undergone ceqa review. many of the projects are moving forward since the funding that has been secured. today, we're here to request the following actions. to start initiation of the amendment of the plan of the general plan. this proposed amendment would incorporate the plan in the general plan and states that the new improvements in the plan area should follow recommendations [unintelligible] the proposal -- the proposed hearing of january 20, 2011. future actions has the commission to consider the following actions. the adoption of ceqa findings. the adoption of

commissioner sugaya: my i ask what this means? >> the added condition is for an overriding consideration that would make this item come to you sooner. the maker of the motion could ask for that. >> that's always the case. >> my understanding is if the item would come to you sooner -- >> if it was earlier. >> basically, you have to have this date. >> that is fine. >> aye. >> thank you. >> olague? >> aye. >no. >> aye. >> commissioners, the item is moved. and items 3, 4, nadnnd 5 cannot be heard before the certification of the eir. if it is moved up they can be considered at an earlier date. >> with that, the join hearing is concluded. >> the joint hearing is closed. thank you, hbc commissioners. thank you. >> i work with the department of environment and we are recycling oil. thank you. we can go into a refinery and we can use it again. they do oil changes and sell it anyway, so now they know when a ticket to a. hal>> to you have something you want to get rid of? >> why throw it away when you can reuse it? >> it can be filtered out