PC 09/22/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chairperson Roberts commented that she feels it is unfortunate that some of the items discussed at the September 8 meeting went to Council before the Commission had an oppommity to correct the minutes. The minutes of September 8, 1999 were approved as corrected. MEETING OPEN FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON ANY ITEM WHICH IS NOT ALREADY ON THE AGENDA Jack Hovingh, 4250 Muirwood Drive, clarified that at the meeting of September 8 he expressed concern about Commissioner Kumaran's addition to the motion that he made at the July 28 meeting. Mr. Hovingh advised that he listened to the tapes a second time and that Commissioner Kumaran's motion as he corrected it was as he stated it. He expressed concern about the rather "cavalier" attitude of some people. He noted that when commissioners are appointed, it becomes a very important part of their lives and other things that have previously been important probably should take a back seat in order to allow attendance at meetings. He stated that he realizes this is a sacrifice and he appreciates it that the Commissioners and staff are here when everyone has other commitments. Mr. Hovingh expressed his disappointment regarding Mr. Sullivan's comments on page 15 of the September 8 minutes. He advised that as a Planning Commissioner they are advisory only and give advice to the Council. He noted that the Council is a publicly- elected body and that they have different view points on issues and have the additional parameter of politics which the Commission should not have. He stated that he is disappointed that some people do not yet understand the process. He advised that the proposal that someone from the Planning Commission attend City Council meetings to address the Council on things that the Planning Commission has reviewed is totally unnecessary and takes away from citizens' rights. He noted that the Planning Commission's comments are part of the public record, which the City Council receives. He advised that in his opinion for the Planning Commission to appoint a liaison to the City Council to address the Council on actions the Commission has taken, and to, in part counter the staffreports, is absolutely unnecessary and infringes on the rights of people to address the Council in that there is only so much time, and the Councilmembers who have read their packets are already aware of the Planning Commission's views. Commissioner Maas commented that with regard to the discussion of concerns about time constraints and the ability for Commissioners to attend special meetings, this would obviously include another meeting that someone would need to appear. Matt Morrison, 5581-A Sonoma Drive, advised that the State has come out with comments on the Bernal Property analysis that was done for the City and County of San Francisco. He noted that it is not as clear as the first pronouncements that were made. He noted that there were some computation problems, references to the equations that were not actually contained in the references, and there were some questions on the measurements and the minimum detectable activities. He distributed copies of the State's letter to the Planning Commission. He advised that he is not sure how this information will be reviewed by the Pla~ing Commission and stressed that he believes that if the developer is going to be required to do more detailed testing during the PUD process the most appropriate way would be to present the information that has PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 2 September 22, 1999