the south of market community. we are sensitive to any shadowing of a park. a neighborhood park in a section where there are very few, very little open space. and this particular shadowing includes the basketball courts, the children play area, lawns, benches, and i just can't imagine how this commission could permit this type of shadowing in a neighborhood park as someone said before me, this is a matter of principle. we have to stop the shadowing of our public parks. this is not a private park, this is a public park, and it is a needed park and recreation for the south of market community, and particularly the filipino community. i think it will be an insult to this commission to permit this building to shadow the park. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. also kevin. go ahead. >> good morning. if i were to pour you a glass of water, would you see the glass as half full, or half empty? are you an optimist or a pessimist? the point of these questions is to demonstrate that any situation can be seen from multiple points of view as you have heard today. much like the negatives and the positives of this project. when you put the positives down on one side of the paper and the negatives down on the other side , it is overwhelmingly one-sided. the negatives, the sun hits dog mount centre park. no children are affected, and the sun is setting around dinner time. no good parent in the rightful mind is not to let their kid play after dark anyway. let's just call that true. no one here is tarnishing her name at all. the positives are $150,000 is being donated to the parks department to be used positively theirs improved commercial space so businesses can thrive. a boost in the job force and economic infrastructure, 63 new residents that house individuals and families so they can have a beautiful place to call home, and that is the short of it. this project benefits family as, the communities, the job force, in the housing community in the city of san francisco. everything being proposed is with the best interest in mind. think about the people it will help and in the happiness it will bring those who can one take all this building home. would you not want that? don't we want to give san francisco a better chance to improve their quality of life? please ask yourself these questions. thank you. >> next speaker, please. if i called your name, please be ready to come up and comment. >> good morning. my name is rudy. i am with the san francisco filipino-american chamber of commerce. for the record, i am not being paid to appear here. i'm here simply because i am prepared to appear before you because of our city's need for more housing, and what is happening with our filipino families is real -- really outrageous. my wife and i raised four children in the city from infancy until adulthood. and our first sun is now living -- i will first son is living in oregon, the second is living in lodi, our youngest daughter is living in oakland, and it is breaking up the families. these are the things that we value the most. i am a friend of victoria manolo graves. i advocated for the city to name the park after her. i work with our friend here, director ginsburg, to install a bronze plaque. a describes her remarkable experience during the 1948 london olympics. and she is dead now. if she were here today, ladies and gentlemen, she would tell you that the shadow that is being cast on the park is mitigated for our need for more housing, and on her behalf, i respectfully request that you approve this project. thank you for your time. >> thank you. i know we have been joined by supervisor jane kim and i want to give her an opportunity if she would like to address the commission. i know she has a busy schedule and an important work to do. >> thank you so much, mr president. i am not more busy than everyone else here in the room but i do appreciate the time to speak on the project. i did come before the commission three years ago to speak on the 1050 folsom project in opposition because of the increased shadow to our only multiuse park in the south of market. as you all know, district six has the smallest and fewest parts of any district in san francisco, and we have been working in conjunction with your staff, and with commission to activate the existing playgrounds and parks that we have, but also to increase the parks and playgrounds that we have. i want to think this commission over the last eight years and being strong advocates for the district and working so closely with community leaders. over the last few years, it has been very clear from our community residents and leaders that they continue to oppose this project as they did three years ago. the larger project cost more shadow onto the only multiuse park in the south of market, and while we have always supported growth and development, in fact our district his building 80% of all of the development in san francisco and 60% of all of san francisco housing, this is the one project that community leaders that i have worked with for a long time, with uniformly -- would uniformly oppose. i have not seen this before. as a representative of the neighborhood, i have to stand strong. we have to have balance development in the south of market. we want to build but make sure we are protecting the parks that we have worked so hard to activate here in the district. so we have asked for your opposition on the allocation of the additional shadow. it is again inconsistent with the commission's position three years ago where we did deny the shadow and i want to thank commissioners commissioners for that. the project is simply larger. we have not been able to work on a resolution. again so many of the community residents and leaders that you have worked so closely with over the last three years want this. thank you for your time after my last eight years. we'd really do have better parks and better activities for its. i look forward to the groundbreaking for sergeant mccauley playground. i hope i will be invited. i look forward to the completion of an important pregnant -- playground for our neighborhoods thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. if i called your name, come on up. >> sorry. good morning, commissioners. my name is katrina. i am the community organizer and campaign coordinator for it so much filipina. i wanted to start off my statement by asking this question. what is the difference between intention and impact. you can always have the best of intentions for a community, but if your impact is negatively affecting it, you have failed in your attempt -- intention. i can go on and on about the importance of this but a bunch of speakers that discuss this already. i wanted to talk about the so-called community meetings that have been convened between the developer and the community. there have been a number of times that dismissive comments have been given to the community members referring to staff, other c.b.o. his and residents as the people over there, opposing this project because of the shadow. there have been a number of times that they are referred to the shadow is not real, as opposed to these images, as you can see, is very real in the rendering that the shadow will be increased. a number of times there were also -- in the last hearing on december 5th, when a bunch of filipino migrant youth had made a video about the importance of the park, their fears in the shadow, as well as the importance of needing this park because a lot of our filipino youth are also considered homeless or under house. if this is the type of rapport that these developers want to make with the community and not acknowledge that this is the filipino cultural heritage district that is believed that the contradictions will simultaneously heighten and deepen. if they really wanted this to be for the community, they would have known that organizations are sharing space. up to 4-5 organizations. they would have known that b.m.r. is not affordable housing they would have known to consult us if we wanted to use that space, and they would have known to consult us if we wanted housing for our community members. i really ask you to consider them to edit the rendering, and i strongly oppose this project. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is kevin. i'm a born and raised san franciscan. i'm raising my two children here in the city. we can all agree that parks are very important to have. i want to point out i think that the development of this project and adding to the additional housing stock should take precedent over the shadow that is currently there. a someone who takes my kids to all of the parks in the city, 5:30 pm or 6:00 we are wrapping up and heading home and having dinner and doing homework. it should not adversely affected the project design is compatible with the pattern and design of the neighborhood. additional shadow would not be adverse and not expected to introduce of the use of the park and the planning department also finds a project is necessary, desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. it should not be detrimental to the persons adjacent to the property. i encourage you to support this project is a need for additional housing stock is more important than the shadow, as well as the additional 15 units and the front for existing units which will be kept on site as well. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> so i have angelica, i have jean, david, charles, and david also. >> i'm a family man who raised two children here. i am here to support the 190 brass project. i was in favor of california's prop ten. it is not another high-rise development. it is providing affordable and beautiful and thoughtful housing in the city. it is an improvement to the area and respectful of the open space , it is a major part of the city heritage. we need to encourage this kind of balance and change in the city. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners. this comes down to housing versus sunlight for an hour. my name is charles turner. i i'm a native san franciscan. a realtor back a rental property owner, a catering -- catering to conventional and section eight tenants. in the past, they made an error in judgement which was offset by working with the city in preserving rental units for existing tenants. all of us have made an error in the past and asked for forgiveness. the focus should be on this project and additional housing as opposed to the developer. i ask you find it in your heart to forgive them for a past error , and allow the construction of these 63 much-needed rental housing units thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. good morning. i am a resident of san francisco since 2001, and i'm the current business owner at the property at 1052 folsom. i have been there since 2010, and i want to show my support for the project. i feel that the much-needed housing is going to outweigh the shadow. i live lived literally across the street from the park, and i don't think it is a deterrent. i don't think the shadow will get a deterrent for myself or any other people. want to go to the park and they think oh, i will not go to the park. i don't see children they are like a lot of other folks have said after 5:00 pm. that is when i open my business. i am here supporting the project and i hope you guys consider it. businesses are looking for more housing to get more people in the area. and to help the location thrive. it has come a long way since i've moved there. i would like to see it move forward as well. >> thank you. >> i will call a few more names off. if i have called your name, please call your name. [calling names] >> if i have called your name, come on up. >> good morning. i am an afterschool program team leader. is the only part that we have. -- it is the only park we have. it is an extension of the school playground this is a very important. the site is -- any shadow cast on this would be a significant adverse impact on the community. please do not approve this project. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is jean. i am here to highlight the negative shadow impacts and they strongly oppose the proposed project on the site that would have on the park. soma continues to have the least amount of parks and open space per capita out with only 12-foot full-sized parks. and then it serves as a key element in some of our f. no tours that i host at least twice a month. it will affect the daily use among seniors, families, children, and folks who live in the south of market. it is a crucial part of honoring our history and especially victor victoria -- victoria manolo graves. the shadow will negatively disrupt our interactive tour activities at the park and daily use by summer residents, families and workers in incidents of the carmichael. think about the shadows during standard times, especially after 4:30 pm when there are more shadows. the presentation earlier only noted for daylight savings time but what about for standard time when children need to use the park after 4:30 pm? and this impact should not be taken lightly -- taken lightly by you. the beauty and loot usefulness of this will be degraded and this shadow will have a consequential impact on the use for visitors and users of the park. please oppose the project. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is carla and i'm the executive director of west bay filipino multiservice centre. we have been serving the community for 50 years. we have a 100 year history of filipinos in the south of market i'm here only to echo the opposition for this project and the impact it has on our park. we have one park that we utilize as our supervisor mentioned, we don't have many parks in district six. this is the only park that our families utilize. heather was mentioning from united players that we don't want to be here right now. we have a community party where we are celebrating 200 of youth and families who use the park every day today. this is who this park impacts. it is not just the actual people that it impacts of the time it impacts, by the principal it is setting. what are we letting them know about the only park that is named after a filipino? this is there park. three years ago, unanimously, this was not supported. here it is, bigger than that before, and now what will we do about that while we will see now it is okay and that is not fair. so i want to pleas urge you to remember the decision we made before. understand the impact is more than when the shadow is there but there is a shadow that we utilize in the precedent it sets in the future. and really remember the families that this is impacting. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. i am with the south of market community action network. first, it is unclear why this has not being -- this project will be heard jointly so they have a chance to weigh in on the shadow topics before voted on. for the proposed project, as we have heard, there is a proposed increase point 3.8% shade that would occur for eight months out of the year, affecting the entrance to the park, the play area, the grassy area and the benches. this includes a period of late june where the shadow is present for up to 110 minutes or nearly two hours in the evening time and it is important to note that someone did before that, in june , the sun does not go down until after 8:30 pm. they conducted studies of the usage of the park in early november of this year, and on november 2nd between the period of 5:30 pm and 6:00 pm, there were 66 users of the park including 13 children and it is important to note this was during the wintertime, not during the summer when the sun is out later. as many people have mentioned, this is not the first time the project has been in front of you i think just looking more holistically at how the city treats the south of market and plans for the south of market, often times the city looks at the void of families and children and youth as a place of community and a place that needs to be built up. it is a place of community and a place for families and children to live and thrive and use essential spaces, such as the park public open space. and one of the only full parks in the south of market and as a supervisor mentioned, only the full-service park. we strongly urge you to vote note today on adding new shadows to the parks. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. okay. powerpoint, please. go ahead. >> i wanted to play a video from some of our youth that live here in the neighborhood. >> we barely have city parks here in the south of market. this park is super far. >> you can bring the microphone down -- >> the issue of having a shadow -- [indiscernible]. >> i met a lot of my friends here. the park is important to me and the community because it gives us space for people to enjoy, it is a safe space for children. >> it is not empty but it is not how a park is supposed to be. the building shadow would impact our kids chart shows a perspective of what the park is supposed to look like. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning. my name is lord is. i'm a caseworker and i am here to repeat what i said here last time. for a couple of youth that could not be here. one is from nikki who is -- she joked -- she goes to the general high school. the park mean so much to me living in the soma. my friends play basketball there every summer, which is so important to them. i want to see my friends enjoy the sun as we watch them play for fun. the park is important because we only have a few parks in the selma that we can go and really enjoyed the place without a shadow blocking the sun. i also have a statement from a young man who was 18 years old and is currently attending city college here. he says, i grew up playing at the park, and many of the other kids have the same experiences. it is the only real park that is truly there is. more shadow will limit the exposure to the sun. the kids need to develop their young bodies. more shadows will mean less vitamin d provided by the sun and more shadows can cause people, especially kids to not come to the park as often because of the lack of sun. i am here to oppose this project >> thank you. >> i will call a few more names. [calling names] >> good morning. i am with senior and disability action. we are in opposition to this project. we cannot concede any of our light to the shadows. the park is one of the only large gathering spaces or places in the south of market for south of market residence and debt -- the south of market has one of the lowest parks per capita throughout san francisco. we understand that the project itself will cast shadows that will be in the most used areas such as the basketball court capped the children's play area and the grassy hill. besides being our only community park, it is also very much historical and cultural for the filipino and filipino community. it represents the strength and resiliency of the women and more recently the batting cages which honors a filipino male community member who has shown his endless commitment to both the filipino community, as well as san francisco park and recreation. we ask you to oppose this proposed project. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. if you are not speaking, could you take a seat please, go ahead >> good morning, commissioners. members of the commission, i am here to speak on behalf of myself today. although i do serve on the treasure island development authority board of directors and i had the pleasure of serving with the commissioner for six years on that body. every month when we meet, and we try to be judicious in making our decisions, i am here in support of this project for a very important reason. i am not a shadow expert, but from what i've read, i see the impact of this project to be minimal after 6:00 pm. when most park users use the park in the morning and during the day, the park is not going away. it will be here. the members of the community will still be able to enjoy this park every day of the year, and in addition to that, there is a contribution that is being made by the project sponsor to the department for security and for other services that will affect the community. all in all, with the mandate of 5,000 housing units to be built into the city this year, we struggle with that on treasure island of how to find funding. here we have somebody who is willing and able to build a 63 unit building to give back to the community, and i will urge you to support this project. thank you so much. [please stand by] this project was at 0.38 increase. and as an outdoorsman, we have seen pictures today of the summer solstice. we had concern from the community about the winter solstice and standard time. this project, due to its location and the location of the sun will have -- impact on the park during the wintertimes of the year. once again, this project casts a shadow and provides housing for san francisco than we desperately, desperately need. thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. i have been a resident of san francisco for approximately 12 years as well. i am not filipino. i have used this park on a number of occasions. for morning coffee, having a sandwich and hanging out during the day and having time to myself. and for me, the additional shadow here would really impact me minimally. so i just want to let you know that. and i reiterate what the gentleman said. there are standards for a reason. it is less than 1% additional shadow. this is .34. there is no reason for you guys to deny the additional housing that would be added to this location. further, on behalf of the parks department, they would want to have additional families who would use the park more often. having the building across there -- ther there -- >> next speakers, please. >> i just want to say a couple of things just from experience. i have been in the neighbourhood since 1989. one of the things i liked about how this was, -- you don't see too much sunlight. there are not many parks. number two, the sun, it is important for the kids. when i first started to work in the area, in the neighbourhood, they played basketball. they were in vacant lots. the vacant lots are no longer there. they are housing. we do need housing. there are other places to put the housing. put the housing in treasure island. you know. we have to preserve and protect the shadowing. i urge you guys to keep that in mind. it is one of the few places that has sun in the city. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> good morning, commissioners. i am michael stack. i am a resident and happen to be born in san francisco. i am in support of the project. believe it or not, i grew up playing basketball in a lot of the local parks in san francisco. i was on the way having dinner, after playing, if i did so, the shadow did not affect me. i am in support of the development to keep children safe and the community safe. >> next speaker, please. >> i am here to say the project should go on for affordable housing. i think this should go on. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> i lived here all my life. the shadow issue is the silliest issue i heard in my life. [indiscernible] there is a lot you can do. >> the housing, people really need. you know. and come on, man, we are all adults. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> i am donald gillis. i am in support of the project because of the housing. and i believe -- >> speak more into the mic. >> my family are pushed out and forced to move. they are being taken from the community they were born and raised in. and i am in support of doing more housing and maybe ending homelessness too. thank you. >> next speaker. i am going to call more names. (reading names) >> i was born and raised here also. and i understand the importance of the parks. but the shadowing will not affect it as much as people that need housing. this will provide -- we need housing, we need 15 units. i think it is really important versus the shadow thing. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning. i just would like to ask you to consider, you know, what it communicates, the project was rejected on account of the shadow. thank you. >> thank you. >> the next speaker. >> hello. goldman architects. i am adjacent to the project. i have a large dog. a greyhound. i use the park twice a day. i asked seamus if it would bother him. he was fine. i totally get the concerns from the community groups. many of whom are my friends. i spend time with them. i think that the mitigating circumstances here actually, one of the biggest ones is the fact that on the hill there will be a dog park. the people don't use the hill now. it is informally used as a dog park. some do not pick up after the dogs. it is used for dogs. no one uses it. the dogs are not concerned about the shadows. the dogs will use the hill. that is the greatest impact of the shadow. it is a strong mitigating factor. normally i am not in favour of shadows on the park. the biggest shadow is the dog park and the other area the entrance to the park and nobody spends time in that area. the other area, the northeast corner is all shaded. but in the afternoons. that does not affect playing basketball. additional housing is very important. as architect i am in support. i think in this specific shadow, it is very acceptable because of the dog park which is the greatest shadow. thank you. >> next speaker. >> i am kingston will, i was born and raced in tised in bay . i am surprised by the amount of passion that erupted in this, both in favour of the dog park and the favour of the park and housing. i myself am a business owner that is located half a block aw aw away in the area. i walk by the park on the way to work. the greatest concern with my business is having neighbours in the area that like to go out and kind of frequent my business. my biggest concern as a business owner as side from the customers and the employees, i have 20 of them, and quite a few can -- none of them live in the area. they come from other areas of the city. i think the project provides an invaluable resource in affordable housing in the area. i am surprised, i don't know if it is rule, 25%, of the 63 units are below market rates which seems like an incredible feature to have. i have heard there are $150,000 donated to the park could be applied to producing a spotlight to offset the shadow. prior to starting the restaurant, i was an accountant. i looked at the numbers. the park is 2 acres large and .5% increase in the amount of shadow to me computes to be 435 feet. i imagine that a large tree planted in the park would cast a 435 square feet shadow. it doesn't seem like a large sacrifice for the creation of housing in the area. and so i like to vote in favour of the project. thank you. >> next speaker. john larry leroy. if i call your name, come up, please. (calling names) >> welcome. >> thank you. i am leroy staples. i am in support of the project because we need a lot of housing here. we can get by with the shadows. so i hope you guys approve this. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners. i am with the equity centre. a low profit location. i am here to urge you to oppose the development. i think it is a disservice to the people that live in the community and for the people that use the park as a space to gather and play. so according to the report from 2011 to 2015, district 6, there are many seniors in the area. many have an income in the poverty level. really who is the park benefiting is the people that live in the district, the seniors on fixed income, they do not qualify for the units. they are way below to qualify for. increasing the shadow, you are setting a precedent for other developments to push little by little. the park is a cultural aspect for district 6 and the filipino heritage district. this park is an asset to the city of san francisco and we ask that you don't take our sunshine away. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. if i called your name, come on up. >> hi, commissioners. the video earlier are some of the people that i work with. the park is the only park that they know. some of them just moved here, two, three years ago. that is the first place they go to. and they feel at home. they can be themselves in the park. district 6 has a population higher than any district in the city. the population increases, 80% of the city development is happening in district 6, particularly. there are only two large parks in the neighbourhood. it is unacceptable that any shadow be cast on the park. we like you to partner with us to keep the open space. it will completely disregard the open space to the residents. please take action to recognize that the project will impact the parks. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello. [indiscernible] and this is where my friends hang out. this park is not just a regular park to us. this is basically our -- like our second home to us because when we came here in america, we are not welcome by -- people. basically in a way, this park kind of like gave us a way to be with the people that actually are with us. we meet new people in the park too. please do not vote on this project, thank you. >> next speaker, please. i will read all the names. that is all the cards i have. if you want to speak and your name has not been called, come on up. (names being called) go ahead. >> good morning commissioners. happy solstice. i am here today in opposition of the projects. as the only multi-use park. the only public school in district 6. a park that is named after the woman who grew up a couple of blocks away from the site. it houses the batting cage. in the district, we take the development of our community and the impact of the development very seriously. affordable housing, is important. it can be done in a way that is accountable to the community. this decision will set a precedent for future developments that can encroach on the little space we have. depriving our area of sunlight. supporters have been paid by the developers here today that have not been advised of the effects of shadows. we are fighting for elements here. in new york, they are paying for airspace. this is what we are setting precedent for, in san francisco. we are fighting for elements. depriving our community of sunlight. depriving our community of vitamin d. that has a direct correlation to depression. this is because of the limited space. we humbly ask that you repeat the position that you made four years ago for this project that has more of an impact and oppose this project. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. if there is anyone else who wants to speak, i need you to come on up. thank you. >> good morning. >> i need you to speak into the microphone. >> [indiscernible] i was born in this city. and the shadow is not a problem. it is about housing. not just educating the -- the rich that can afford [indiscernible] but this is about our home. family, kids who can't afford to be players [indiscernible] the sun is the day. we have to think about the long-term goal. you know, 30% of the country is now living in tents. in 10-15 years, what is that going to do? you know what i mean for unity in the country. not just in san francisco. there are tents all over the country. we are worried about a shadow. you know what i am saying? thank you all for listening. happy holidays everyone. thank you. >> the next speaker. over here, please. that's fine. >> i want to get this -- >> you need to get started. >> the planning commission is to approve in a couple of hours. this is the shadow. the report has been made -- the recommendation of the general manager of the department, not of the commission. the commission doesn't have a position yet. it was consulted and so the planning commission is going to approve the project, is slated to approve the project because you haven't said no. you must say no because we can't do this shadow in the park. when you drafted conditions, limiting the shadow after 1989 when passed, you didn't have any park [indiscernible] and there is a 0% increase. your commission, your staff has been saying you don't have area, because it is not accessible until open. there is a 0% limit. with the consultation of this commission and the planning department, bit by bit, by bit, you need to have -- go back and do a shadow analysis. what you would have done. the market is important because it is a low income community and really dependent on open space. if you don't stop and say we have to do an evaluation of both parks, is 0% appropriate for the park like it is for all the parks in the area. you have a real obligation today to look at -- as well as other parks. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else who wants to make public comment? if you do, please come up now. go ahead if you want to make it. make it. we will not call anymore cards. keep going please. >> i would like to focus on the shadow if you have a building and what happens to the shadow. first of all, the shadow -- there were guidelines issued for parks all over the city. one of the guidelines is parks larger than 2 acres. this park is one of these parks. and for those parks, it is recommended that they would be allowed a 1% additional shadow on the park to accommodate new construction. in this case, what i would like to show you is a comparison of this project, and also what happened if you have only a 40 foot high building which as the commission knows, has no limit on the amount of shadow they can have. so right now, we are talking about 30% of the shadow. it is not 30%. rather, the new shadow in total for the project -- for 15 minutes a day this is the percent. the colour of dark blue is the shadow [indiscernible] >> good afternoon. i am part of the design team. i have been part of the projects over the past 25 years. i would like to point out the fact that this developer is providing 25% of housing and the four units. they are going to be rent control. if you do the math, you will see that this is over 30% non-market rate units. i have been a developer for years in this town, i have not seen that many developers that can digest 30% affordable housing. this developer not only is giving the 150,000 approval of the park. at 30%, non-market rate units. and to deprive the city from this great development, i think it would do disservice to this great city of ours. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> good morning, commissioners. (please stand by) >> we don't always agree on things, and for us to all say we oppose this project, is huge. the question now is, are you going to de- prioritize our voice again that you have been doing on and on -- on and on for the south of market quaff if this shadow is in another part, like the marine or golden gate, will you vote the same way because there is a real question of equity and whose voice matters most. i hope you will use your leadership and really listen to the community. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else who would like to make public comment quaff ? public comment is closed. >> thank you. commissioner low quaff. >> i want to first say where the first -- where the first recreation and park commission on the matter that is before us is whether this shadow poses a significant and adverse impact. it is just a shadow. it is only a recommendation. and to both sides, it is not about for or against the project it is just the impact of the shadow on the park. i think the decision of whether we choose housing versus parks, that is for the colleagues on the planning commission to make that decision. i'm sure it will be repeated again this afternoon, but our focus is just the impact of the shadow on the park there are some impacts to certain

Related Keywords

New York , United States , California , Philippines , Oakland , Drake Park , San Francisco , Filipino , America , Donald Gillis , John Larry Leroy , Charles Turner , Jane Kim ,