>> good morning. this is a special meeting of the planning commissioner. before i take role, i would remind everyone to turn off your cell phones or any othe relectronic -- other electronic devices that may sound off during the proceedings. role call. moore? sugaya? fong? antonini? olague? migue? gwyneth borden is expected. the item on this calendar is 2006.37 i, the academy of arts institutional master plan. >> the item before you is an information item, the academy of arts institutional master plan. this requires a large institution to file a large institutional master plan everything years to detail current facilities and operations. when the submission has been determined by the planning department, with all information in accordance with the planning code, the planning commission will have a public hearing. this is for the receipt of public testimony in cannot constitute the approval or disapproval. the service three principal purposes. to provide notice and information to the planning commission and other agencies and the -- the general public. and to give the opportunity for these plans prior to the building design and by the institution. and to make modifications to the master plan with the public hearings prior to the more detailed planning. and the new redevelopment proposed in the net -- master plan, and to provide the neighborhood organizations and the general public that may help to guide their decisions. this is with regard to the use an investment of land and the provision of public services, and particularly the planning of similar institutions to make certain of -- the costly duplication does not occur. this is required to be updated every two years. the public hearing is the third to be held on the academy of arts university. the first hearing was december 6, 2007. at that hearing it was not accepted and the questions and concerns related to the use of property by the academy, with a loss of affordable housing and potential transportation impacts related to the growth of the academy. the commission has asked that they address these concerns and continued the transportation study. the academy has continued to grow and requires additional facilities. what is before you know is the third draft prepared since last july, the result of a series of meetings and memorandums between the planning department and the project sponsor. this includes the property acquisition and the adoption of free use. the impact on housing and nonresidential and commercial tenants, and the specific potential sites for accommodating most of the five- year space needs. a summary of the violations on academy property and includes the detail transportation studies to a identify the potential impact with implementing the five and 10- year growth plan. in the executive summary of the third section, it describes how the inp meets each of these items. the first public comment, we have received nine comments -- eight comments, and seven by telephone and one letter that is in the packet. this appears to meet all the requirements of the planning code including the information specifically requested by the commission. the purpose is to inform the public about the institution, the purpose of the hearing is to express concerns, it is expected that this will follow the public,. no action is required by the commission under section 3 04 0.5 e, and closing the public hearing and the acceptance of this does not mean that the commission approves of this or agrees with any statement or supports any past or future actions of the institution. this item is informational only, represented on behalf of the project sponsor. i am here to answer any questions. >> and thank you. the project sponsor? >> hello. i am here on behalf of the academy of arts university. i just want to begin by saying, i am pleased that we are here, moving forward with the institutional master plan. i think that i just want to thank, the department's staff for all the work that they have done, leading up to this. we think that this is a challenging effort to put together an institutional master plan that has multiple campuses, multiple does -- disciplinary approaches, and the potential for great growth in the future for san francisco and its own community. we understand the challenges of what this took and we're happy that we have a document that we believe is clear and gives a good picture of where we are and where we are going. i think that -- i do want to say that there is one thing that we disagree with in the staff report. i would comment that this is the first institutional master plan. we believe that if you look back at the december 2007 hearing, the staff report says that this section was complete, and the hearing did take place in the hearing was closed. i did not want to dwell on that because this is in the past. i am please to go forward and i am pleased that the report today does say that all of those required of the commission is to accept the plan, to determine whether this is complete with section 304.5. now, i understand why there has been some confusion in the past about this. during some of the hearings with regard to the academy of art university, a lot of confusing information was given to the commission. in fact, at one time, it was advised that we could not have this hearing on the master plan without the eir being completed. but because there is no approval been requested, i am please to say that we are moving forward as well. there is a slight delay but this has picked up again. and we look forward to all the other elements going forward. this is a major step for us to get behind. and i think more importantly, this will be what we need to go forward because in the future, the commission can review the conditional uses, and building permits and any other applications for the future buildings or the existing buildings that will be operated by the academy of arts. this is the appropriate place to determine whether or not the buildings and facilities being used by the academy are consistent with the planning code, and did not have significant environmental impact. we're all here today to listen to the comments of the commission and the concerns, and president stevens is here to hear your comments. we also have the consultants who appeared with the institutional master plan. we have the other staff that have been working on elements of the master plan, and we have others working on the enforcement activity. we believe we will answer any questions that you may have, but by closing the hearing today, this does not mean that you don't have the opportunity to ask us for additional information. you can still ask us for additional information, but we want for you to make those calculated tasks of adopting this institutional master plan by accepting this by the end of the day. >> we will open this up for public comment and we have one speaker card. jim lazarus. >> good morning, commissioners. as you have just heard, the purpose of the institutional master plan is to alert the public as to what the institution is doing and the current impact and future plans. the chamber of commerce, in reviewing the document that has been before you before does this. this alerts the community and the city and this commission as to the academy of arts and their current activities and future plans. san francisco, after a ballot measure directed the development of an economic plan for the city. the plan that came out of the plate -- the mayor's office had a knowledge-based economy and a visitor-based economy. the academy of arts university is a home run on both fronts. this is part of the growing knowledge base of san francisco and its programs bring visitors to the city as well. $211 million of direct economic benefit, from their programs in san francisco. over 2000 full-time and part- time employees -- one of the few employers that have grown jobs in the last four years. i. anderson the frustration of the commission, with the growth of this institution. but i think that we're on track with your acceptance of the master plan, the involvement of the community and the environmental review process. and the conditional use applications that can follow to bring this institution, an important part of the economy and educational growth in san francisco. the chamber urges you to accept this document before you and to move the issue forward. >> and is there additional public comment on this item? seeing -- >> thank you. i am melissa jo kelly. i have been a resident since 1996. i'm asking you to reject this master plan because i do not believe that this is complete. i am happy that today is an informational presentation and the commission can modify the master plan. this is a well-designed portrait of edmund of this institution. this is a for-profit institution. this increases the wealth of the owners. one-third of the students are international. this is in thailand and indonesia. many of these families are making great sacrifices so that their children can have the american dream. but the real wealth is the real estate. i have watched the university and its logo appear on building after building. who is keeping count on the number of people that have been displaced? what is not included is the same thing that is missing with the operations of the institution. who is universally accountable to? they are not accountable to the 200 -- 2259 employees. in fact, they were bused in the unions back in the 1980's. the 200 on-site students, to my knowledge, the knowledge of this institution, it is very hard to gain. they're answering questions that were not email. finally, the inp says the university b. hayes in an ethical matter, but they destroyed a theater, with 250 seats and the only major african-american theater company in the state of california. >> this is three minutes. >> i appreciate this. >> and you can submit any thing. is there additional public comment? i would ask that people who are interested in speaking, to line up. >> we just don't have any additional speaker cards. >> i was here to listen and i thought that there were comments -- i will keep this brief. we are concerned about the housing impact. there is no discussion to address the impacts. given the substantial growth of this institution, with a private institution, they are converting them to basically dormitories. this is of great concern. this encircles the whole downtown eastern corridor. anyone who has been to college knows that living in college -- with a permanent residence, although they are converting individual units, there is the impact of the existing residence. it results in a loss of the affordable housing. this is inherently transitory. we don't think this report, that this issue is addressed at all. and the commission should review the impacts and make certain of the continued growth of this institution. this is not to say that the institution should not impact the jobs and resources. but like any institution, they should be looked at and required to address the increased houses on the existing neighborhoods. >> thank you. >> i am alice from pacific heights. there is a corner building that is occupied by the academy of arts university. this was grandfathered in. very often the stretch limits, they block all the driveways and they disappear and we do not find them. we can get in or get out. you can see this from the outside. i understand that the students can be admitted if they played the -- pay the tuition. i am just afraid that without that kind of test, to know that these students are real students, i don't want more terrorists in this country, using the school to do other things. i don't mind if people make a lot of money if they are smart enough to do this. but i think that we have to watch what people are doing and i don't want to have occupy wall street to occupy the academy of arts. it really scares me what is going on. there is not enough oversight for the institution. >> a good morning, comm