|
Minutes
of the
Presidio Neighborhood Representative Work Group
Friday April 17, 2009
City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton Goodlett Place, Rm. 370
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Vice-Chair Donald Green called the meeting to order at 1:15 p.m.
Present:
1. Cow Hollow Association – David Bancroft
2. Golden Gate Valley Neighborhood Association – Bob David
3. Lake Street Residents Association – Bill Shepard
4. Laurel Heights Improvement Association – Donald Green
5. Neighborhood Associations for Presidio Planning – Judith Hulka
6. Pacific Heights Residents Association – Carol Brownson;
7. Planning Association for the Richmond – Ray Holland for Redmond Kernan
8. Presidio Environmental Council – Doug Kern;
9. Sierra Club – Becky Evans.
Absent:
10. Jordan Park Improvement Association – Rich Worner
11. Marina Community Association – Martin Beresford;
12. Marina Cow Hollow Neighbors and Merchants – Patricia Vaughey
13. Marina Merchants Association – Peter Singh
14. Presidio Heights Association of Neighbors – Ron Blatman
15. San Francisco Architectural Heritage Organization – Jack Gold
16. Sea Cliff Properties Association – Chris Donohoe
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
By motion of ________ and second by____________ the minutes of Friday, April 10 meeting were approved with correction to show the presence of Marina Merchants Association – Peter Singh.
3. CHAIR REPORT
The chair acknowledged the death of Redmond Kernan who re-formed this workgroup in response to the Presidio Trust’s new proposals for the Main Post. There was general agreement that the Workgroup’s report should bear his name as honorary chair.
Mr. Green turned to a consideration of the effect the April 6, 2009 Section 213 Report from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation would have and how this committee should best proceed. Since the 213 report is highly critical of the SDSEIS, there is the possibility that the Trust may substantially revise their proposal yet again, setting this committee the challenge of developing a third set of substantial comments in response. There was general discussion of how best to proceed: should this committee only respond to details of Trust proposals, or should it comment on the nature of the proposals and the umbrella issue of updating the PTMP. There is a need to make the comments required for NEPA, but the Workgroup needs to find a way to address the lost vision of the historical respect that should be paid to the Main Post. Ms. Evans and Ms. Hulka volunteered to draft a document for consideration at the next meeting.
3. ROLE OF CITY AGENCIES
There was discussion about the roll of city departments at this point. Should the workgroup ask for representatives from city departments to report on their progress on their reports?
Catherine Stefani reported that city agencies have given their reports to the City Attorney’s office and the contents of these reports are confidential until the Mayor signs the report. Mr. Bancroft suggested the workgroup finish its report two weeks early and send it to city agencies and ask for comments on points relevant to their agencies. There was general agreement with this idea.
4. EA FOR PARADE GROUND
There appear to have been changes made to the proposed design of the Main Parade since a design was approved by a separate EA. Mr. Shepard noted different descriptions in the 213 report, starting with the description of what was approved (p. 21 of the 213 report) and a “Revised Main Parade Design of March 2009 (Fig. 25 of the 213 report). There was discussion of “stone features” in the original EA that have disappeared in later drawings. What is the process for thus amending an EA? The cumulative effects of the Trust’s new proposals must include the plan for the Main Parade, but this appears to be a moving target. The plan for the Main Parade has not been made available to the workgroup.
5. CONTINUATION OF WORKGROUP
There was discussion of how best to continue the workgroup as a permanent group considering boundary issues with the Presidio. Development at the Presidio has effects on the city, city services and quality of life.
Ms. Stefani pointed out that this Workgroup has no sunset clause.
Agenda for next week should include options for continuing workgroup.
6. TIMELINE
Mr. Kern will try to have revisions ready for group earlier in the week before next meeting on May 1. Four weeks will remain before new June 1 deadline for comments to the Trust.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
Dana Polk, Presidio Trust Office of Public Affairs, advised our committee that the Trust had decided to extend the comment period on the SEIS until June 1, from April 27. She also said that the 213 report was considered by the Trust as Public comment, the same as any other public comment. In response to questions, she contributed that the Trust would raise the money for the restoration of the Parade Ground. She said she did not know what the 20,000 sq. ft. of new construction shown as held in reserve refers to.
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m.
|
