Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    August 22, 2013 8:00pm-8:31pm PDT

8:00 pm
bubbles, and the usability of the space will also be greatly increased by improving the turf area and the buffering some of the high traffic areas nearby as well as from the parked cars that are there on lincoln. another great thing about this project is it's being privately funded so, there's not actually any public resources that need to go into this project. thanks to the generosity of the crane foundation. and, so, this is a great opportunity to accept a wonderful gift from them for the city. so, we urge your support for the project and look forward to working with you on it. thanks very much. >> thank you. >> [speaker not understood]. hello, i'm carla crane. i'm the founder and funder, and i just thought you might want to know a little history how this all came to pass.
8:01 pm
my parents passed away, i thought i would find a project that would honor them and the city that we all loved. and there were avid gardners and nature lovers and i have a background in the arts. so, what followed was -- what inspired me, anyway, was two things. the wonderful [speaker not understood] in the presidio. and in new york, if you've been to the jai-alai, you know these are two projects that have brought artful interventions to lots of people in an urban setting. so, i love that idea. so, that led me to phil ginsberg who is very enthusiastic and he arranged the tour for me to look around all their wonderful sites. and it was kesar triangle that really took my heart. so, there was something about
8:02 pm
it, it's kind of under loved and a little scrappy, didn't seem to interrupt any activities that were going on. what i really love was that you could not only experience maybe something artful on the ground, but it is as well when you drive by, maybe there was some way you could catch people's imagination. ~ as well when you're up in csf looking down there is an aerial view from [speaker not understood] hill. and i love that. fortunately, i met sam bower. he's been invaluable. together we saw this whole little park should be treated as art, and we have, you know, seen that it needs to be healed and kind of brought back to life. and, so, i hope that this project can in some way be an example or a precedent that
8:03 pm
other people could, you know, who are park lovers and donors, that they could focus on one spot and the thought they could partner with rec and park and bring it to its most beautiful possibilities. so, thank you. >> thank you. >> sam. hello, thank you very much. as mentioned before, my name is sam bower and i have a background making environmental art and also as part of an organization called green that highlights projects around the world that address ecological issues through the arts. working with carla over the past couple years on this project and getting to know neighbors and staff at rec and park and their organizations has been a really wonderful experience. and for us, the goal from the
8:04 pm
start has been to combine art, ecology, and community engagement to help, as carla said, bring some life and attention and love to this section of golden gate park that for many people as jeff said, doesn't really feel like golden gate park. and it's an area that is really windswept. not a lot of trees and attention go into it. it's a basic sort of open space and the opportunity there to address irrigation issues, involve local folks to select native plants, and make it that much better. and from an arts perspective, weave that into all the physical improvements in a way that engages neighbors, makes it fun, helps people connect to local history, and learn a bit
8:05 pm
more about the ecosystems and really [speaker not understood] serves as an entry point to the rest of golden gate park. on the map, you might not be a clear, but this is a major entry point for families also going into the children's playground, and into other field and things nearby. so, for people in the inner sunset, it's a place that they're quite excited about to have as a gathering area. andth cultural events in the hope that long-term with the arts -- kesar triangle arts coalition, this could be a place people could propose temporary projects that really highlight the beauty and history and connection of the place. so, we urge you, of course, to support this and i really hope that as this thing moves along we have a chance to visit the
8:06 pm
kesar triangle and connect to the local history there. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else who would like to make public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners? >> well, i just want to say before we vote that we owe a debt of gratitude to carla crane for supporting this financially and having the vision to see what could be done to a place that needs a little tlc. i think it is a very visible space and i like the idea of contemplating community art exhibits. i love the goals worthy projects in the presidio, the sculptures that are on loan down at crissy field. and sam, thank you, jeff miller as well. with that, entertain a motion. >> well, aside from the comment that our general manager is energetic, i would move this forward for approval. and i felt the president's remarks and thank the crane foundation and all those who
8:07 pm
are involved on this exciting project. >> i second that, commissioner. >> point of clarification before we -- >> sure. >> before we move on this item. i just wanted to have a clearer understanding of the design elements for this project. so, all of these pictures in here that are renderings in here, are all of these -- >> commissioner, clearly speak -- >> yes. first of all, are the design elements finalized or you're still working on refining these? and the other question is the design elements that i see in here, are they already -- i mean, is it set in stone that they will be part of this triangle? just want to get clarification
8:08 pm
on this. >> well, we have had three public meetings in light of input from the public. so, the location of the path is very well final, i would say. we have shared this with staff of the park and vetted all of the plant material with them. so, those seem to be on track. we will be going to the maintenance, structural maintenance group for their final review with the construction documents. but we're getting closer and i think we've got a fairly final layout of what we've got and there may be some tweaking with some of the plant material. we've got an irrigation plan that's underway and it's being finalized right now. so, i'd say we're pretty close. >> okay. and along those lines you touched on something that i
8:09 pm
actually wanted to -- with regard to a question i wanted to raise, and that is the plant material. we're talking about planting, putting in some vegetation plants along those areas to serve as a buffer between the cars or the vehicles that continue to be parked there, i would imagine. have we paid particular attention to the types of plants that we will be using with regards to the exhaust fumes of those vehicles and -- because oftentimes when i've gone through the park i do see places of that in some of our plants that we have now. i just wondered if you had any -- took that into consideration, the types of plants relative to the
8:10 pm
continued parking activity. >> most of the consideration for the plant material really had to do with size of the plant material, the sustainability of those materials so that they're not water loving plants. the visibility for police along the edge so that they can still see into the park. and actually most of the parking there is all head-in parking. so, it's not people running their exhaust into the plant. >> yes, they do. >> there is also a sidewalk that separates that edge of the park from the planting areas. but it's a good comment. and as we, as we finalize the final, final, final data, we'll certainly take a look at that and make sure that these plants will be sturdy and hearty. our main goal with the plants are to create -- and this kind of comes out of the community and from review from the park
8:11 pm
staff folks, is to create kind of broader swaths of plant material so that we have bigger impact of certain species as opposed to a very mixed planting design where we have three plants here, five plants there, six plants there. so that this will have significant visual impact on the area. but really most of the discussion has been about safety and about visibility and actually we kind of wanted to plant a lot more trees than the parks department wanted us to plant. but we're happy with the amount of trees. >> i would appreciate if you do get some consideration or some thought to that. >> sure. >> what the type of plants that will be there. >> well, yeah, we've definitely given a lot of consideration to what types of plants there, but as far as the pollution, that's an interesting comment. thank you for that. >> thank you.
8:12 pm
denny. >> yes, thank you. just a follow-up to the response to the commissioner baneia. thanks for the question. our landscape team has looked at the entire landscape plan and the species recommended. [speaker not understood]. they like the mix. they like the fit within golden gate park. as jeff said, the current species we have in there expands them a bit, but in a way that aligns with the park design. so, we think it's going to be a very good plant [speaker not understood]. >> thank you. yeah. >> seeing no other questions, we have a motion by commissioner low. is there a second? >> second. >> seconded. all those in favor. >> aye. >> so moved. thank you. >> commissioners, we're on item 12, [speaker not understood] athletic field and innovation project, award of contract. ~
8:13 pm
>> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is [speaker not understood]. i'm standing in for dan mower today. the item before you today is discussion and possible action to approve a resolution of debt findings, a negative declaration and mitigation monetary and important program, california environmental quality act. and two, to award a construction contract to o.c. jones and sons. the lowest responsible bidder for the [speaker not understood] and levee ward renovation project in the amount of $4,483,000. just to provide a bit of background for you for this project, this project is part of the fairfield initiative
8:14 pm
program in partnership with the city field foundation. they are also here today. this will be the 13th field renovation we have completed at eight different park sites. improvements for this project includes field lights, field drainage improvements, fencing, new pathways, new parkway entrances that meet accessibility for requirements, landscape and irrigation improvements. this project was bid in may of this year. we saw a total of four bids in june. so this year also. the low bid did not make the contract requirements because it did not meet the minimum qualifications that were set for the project. hence, we are moving to o.c. jones for this bid of -- amount
8:15 pm
of $4,483,000. this contractor has been approved by the city administrator's contract monitoring division as a medium to local business enterprise goal of 21%. this project has received c-e-q-a approval. a mitigated negative declaration which the commission approved in [speaker not understood] of 2012. although the commission approved this m. m.d. already, the lowest bid that we need to approve it at each phase of the project ~. there is only one mitigation measure left which we have to complete, which is to complete the back survey prior to removal of some of the trees. we have a biologist under contract, and this will be completed towards the end of
8:16 pm
this month and prior to proceeding on the work. this project is anticipated to go into construction in late september and complete by the summer of 2014. the contract duration is approximately 270 days. the department will host the groundbreaking ceremony as the construction nears and all the commissioners will be invited. this particular contract does not include the synthetic turf material. we are bidding this material separately under a separate contract. the turf work will be completed at the same time as the site improvements. the reason we have bid this separately is we are currently refining our specifications for this project and we want this project to benefit immensely
8:17 pm
from that analysis. dan marrow will come back to you in a few months to award the synthetic turf contract. therefore, the staff recommends that you approve the resolution in your package. i'll be happy to answer the questions you might have. >> i do have public comment. >> i do want to make one comment before that, and simply to note that in october of 2012 we approved the conceptual plan already. so, this matter has been before us in terms of what was planned and this is to let the contract and we adopted findings and mitigation measures associated with the mitigated negative declaration as well. plea. >> i have two card. i have kelly and anastasia, please, in either order. ~ please
8:18 pm
hi, my question is what's wrong with the city and what's wrong with rpd? whenever there is a project that is tree removal. this particular [speaker not understood] intends to move -- i'm not political. now i'm coming here to talk [speaker not understood]. i don't want to be here. with this project and the removal of 59 trees, which are in no way in the project -- [speaker not understood]. how much does it cost to remove each tree? i didn't go -- i only looked at this yesterday. didn't go [speaker not understood]. it's not online. you have to go somewhere and look. but how much each removed tree cost the city? like how much pollution it doesn't absorb? how much c.o.2 is going into the air? how much co2 is not going to be
8:19 pm
observed? ~ and you know, you pay -- i don't know, maybe if the project had been a consultant, we pay consultant to [speaker not understood]. but if you don't remove the trees, you don't [speaker not understood]. i don't know if any of those trees are hazardous. quite often the case, if city wants to do a check, [speaker not understood], take it out. and again, i mentioned before then there is the project for greening the city. they are asking for bid and one of it is promoting the planting of trees in the city. friends of urban forest is planting the trees of the city. rpd is cutting the trees because they don't like the kind, not because they are hazardous. i don't know about the 59 trees. 21 of those are going to be removed. 21 is two-fifths. is it possible to remove the
8:20 pm
trees and give the trees to forestry and [speaker not understood]. thank you. >> i might point out as a matter of information the packets are posted online and there is a description that the trees were evaluated and were deemed hazardous under the standards for the department, just as a matter of information. next speaker, please. >> kelly.
8:21 pm
sfgov, there's a video again. i put this up so you don't have to look at my ugly mug. this project, the [speaker not understood], is for the construction of the infrastructure or an sbrn artificial field. it is specifically designed for an sbrn artificial field. it should be noted coincidentally perhaps in less than 24 hours from now issues with the toxic materials being used in infield fill such as this are being adjudicated in the superior court of the state of california. these hearings will touch upon the insufficiency and completeness of the rpd's negative declarations, the mitigation monitoring, and the reporting program as well as c-e-q-a issues regarding synthetic fields. in contrast to the reports provided by city field and the rpd, public health professionals have provided irrefutable evident to this commission. the rpd and the sponsors of this project, to show that the infill that is to be used in this project contains material that has been found by the
8:22 pm
state of california to be toxic and cancer causing. this is well posted. easily accessible information. additionally, the materials have been found to be carcinogenic [speaker not understood] international agency for research on cancer. approving this contractual agreement mere hours before its health risks are being adjudicated in superior court is clearly not in the best interest of its intended users or the families of san francisco who will not only be exposed to it but will have to replace it when time comes for that. especially for the children of the adjacent shared and elementary school, hundreds of kid in their oceanview neighborhood. i believe that it is reasonable for the families of san francisco that they would best be served by not rushing through this contractual decisions till after a hearing
8:23 pm
about the fundamental materials being used. for future web searches, i'd like to insert some keywords. chemical sensitivities, [speaker not understood], childhood cancer, city fields foundation, carbon black, must go lighting, pisces incorporated, fisher builders, zinc leachate, [speaker not understood], retaining walls, public private partnership, polley aromatic hay drone carbons, [speaker not understood], and mercury poisoning. ~ and i'd like to acknowledge patrick canon as well is here. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners. >> i think we need to do these resolution -- the resolution, do you need to read the title of the resolution? >> i'd be happy to. when it's time to make a motion, if you decide to approve, you will be approving
8:24 pm
the resolution in your packet and that title is approving the award of construction contract for the [speaker not understood] and levee ward athletic fields renovation contract. and adopting findings under the california environmental quality act c-e-q-a. >> is there such a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> moved and seconded. all those in favor. >> aye. >> so moved. >> thank you. we are on item 13, general public comment continued. is there anyone who wants to make general public comment? seeing none, this item is closed. item 14 is commissioners matters. commissioners? >> [speaker not understood]. >> any public comment? seeing none, this item is closed. 15, new business agenda [speaker not understood]. any public comment -- i'm sorry? >> i'm sorry, i didn't see -- commissioner, would you like to say something?
8:25 pm
>> no. >> did you want to finish your sentence? >> no, i was just going to ask if there was any public comment on that item. that's all. >> seeing none, that item is closed. >> no, i would like to make a comment on new business agendas. >> okay. >> item 15, and that is that i would like to strongly urge the department, department staff to hold that meeting regarding the beacon street hill trail and to report back -- to hold that meeting with a community and to report back to us as soon as possible? i think that people in that
8:26 pm
neighborhood have been very patient. and i think that we should proceed to at least at minimum have a meeting out there and to try to bring some resolution to that item. >> will you note that for my next agenda setting a meeting with the general manager? >> thank you. any other commissioners? okay. so, 16 is communications public comment. seeing none, this item is closed and 17 is adjournment. >> moved. >> second. >> moved in second. all in favor? >> aye. [adjourned]
8:27 pm
8:28 pm
8:29 pm
8:30 pm