That would like to speak . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. So, colleagues, can we move this forward without objection . Thank you. And, mr. Evans, can you please call item number 2 . Item number 2 is an ordinance amending the San Francisco environmental code to suspend the yellow pages distribution Pilot Program. Thank you. And the sponsor is president david choo. Thank you, colleagues. As i mentioned at roll call a couple weeks ago, a year and a half ago, we voted 10 to 1 to approve a threeyear Pilot Program to reduce environmental waste and blight from the over distribution of yellow page phone book. I want to thank the members of the Land Use Committee for your support of that legislation. At the time we passed that bill there was only one federal case on the issue which had decided that the city of seattle with the comparable ordinance was allowed to regulate yellow page distribution under the First Amendment. Unfortunately a few weeks ago the threejudge circle panel reverse
After the end of Public Comment. So, im going to call a number of people that have filled out cards and ill just urge people to keep in mind that were not acting on this today. Brent plater from wild equity. Neil [speaker not understood], arthur finestein [speaker not understood], [speaker not understood], Virginia Marshall Sequoia Audubon Society. Brittany [speaker not understood] from wild equity [inaudible]. [inaudible] edth ultimate design or layout of Sharp Park Golf Course. Instead of doing as it promised, the rec and Park Department at the last moment combined a new redevelopment project for the golf course into this preexisting ceqa process for the significant Natural Resource areas Management Plan. All this resolution would do is require the recreation and Parks Department to make good on its word and consider these two different projects through two different ceqa proceedings and nothing more. It will not constrain the citys ultimate decision about what to do, what sharp park
And provide notice for any city adopted service. So, thats kind of the big overview. Now our senior environmental planner sarah jones is going to go through the memo that we handed out today. And there copies on the table for the public. If anyone needs an extra one, they can see us. Could i ask a quick question to staff . Theres references im reading in here, and you just mentioned there had been amendments made to the legislation that we have had before us, but we have not received. Is that correct . That is correct. I would go run copies right now. Im sorry for that. Thats all right. We dont need to do that. Theres one more clarification on your presentation. I just wanted im not sure if i understood this correctly. Two things. You said that if one wanted to speak at a later eir hearing, they had to have addressed the deir hearing to speak at the later hearing . At the appeal hearing, thats correct. All right. That was one thing i wasnt clear about. And the other on negative declara
This out and actually say, lets have everybody at the table at the beginning. Its very difficult to go through all of these pages and to manager this spot or that spot. This is a failing of public process here to have something presented with that kind of timeline, this kind of impact and with no involvement by the public. Ceqa offers many benefits to city residents, government, and to developers by providing considerable notice to the public, encouraging developers and residents to Work Together and to develop mutually beneficial plans, to reduce appeals and costly litigation which is beyond most residents and Community Organizations means anyway, and the government doesnt need costly litigation either. Also, the ceqa process allows reducing appeals to the board of supervisors. But, in fact, there are only about 10 appeals to the board of supervisors in any given year of the thousands of projects. So, thats kind of a safe argument to say we have to protect the board of supervisors fro
One correction to the information in the memo. After the approval an appeal must be filed with the board within 20 days. As mentioned previously, negative declarations can be appealed to the board of supervisors even if they were not appealed to the Planning Commission. Overall, the rules surrounding negative declaration appeals are highly unclear. Included in your tiersv is a case study of an appeal of an Affordable Housing project that this commission reviewed at 31 55 scott street. Under the proposed provisions, the same appeals could occur, but the process would be both shorter and more efficient. In the case of this project, this could have enabled the project sponsor to take better advantage of state funding cycles. As it is, construction has not yet begun on this project as a result of missing some funding cycles. The next category of environmental documents is categorical exemptions. Again, this is a very large range of time, both in term of how long the environmental process t