i am afraid that it is dangerous as well. i should also say that i travel frequently to sweden. when my swedish friends and colleagues heard about this, the were pretty shocked. as a nation, the swedes would not have approved something like this in such a high density neighborhood. thank you. president olague: daniel marshall, julie acocks, kate wong, june wood. >> good evening. my name is daniel marshall. i am a resident in north beach for over 20 years. i have lived in the city for 35.

we all know, whether our opinion is one way or another, that this is a band-aid solution to a problem that needs a comprehensive plan that works for the residents and businesses of san francisco. please stop the current carpet bombing of the antennas in our city. this has got to stop. you guys have to make a stand and work with the supervisors to please stop this process. this is not a solution. one in town after another. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> by name is julie jacocks. i have lived on stockton.

i have some information for each of the commissioners that pertains to some technical information about antennas such as cell phone antennas are not needed for 911 calls in the city. they are able to go out no matter what the infrastructure is. i also wanted to show a map here of only t-mobile antennas in san francisco, as of 2009. these are only t-mobile. i do not know how many others there are in the city from other companies. what i wanted to read to you is about whether he should grant an excess reuse permit -- whether you should grant an accessory use permit. according to the guidelines adopted in 1996, supplemented by the planning commission in 2003, this type of the antenna

would have to have a conditional use permit. but it has been changed to an accessory use permit. this location at 1653 grant is a preference seven location. on page 7, it explains why this is a desirable location for an antenna of this type, this type of site. t-mobile is relying on the zoning administrator determinations from 1996 and engaging in an abuse of the accessory use process. there are commercial projects in a very dense residential neighborhood, as kathryn mentioned. as a t-mobile customer, i work directly across the street at 491 greenwich, the opposite corner. i have been a t-mobile customer

for five years and never experienced gaps in service or dropped calls in that time, even in the back of our gallery. i would love it if you voted to deny an accessory use permit for this site. thank you for listening. president olague: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. welcome, mr. fong. you are new to me. commissioner miguel, i was blown away by your remarks about the industry being confused and disorganized. i think they are also apprehensive. there are three applications before you, but one has been postponed and one has been withdrawn. commissioner moore, once again

you have hit the nail on the head. we are way behind other countries in the way they handle cell phone technology. we are hobbled by federal regulations from the '90s about the level of regulation -- the level of radiation that is safe. i have been told it is not good for this purpose to bring this subject up. however, by handling these one by one by one, it is very destructive. you saw the map, and you could see in the upper right-hand corner that the densest proliferation of antennas is all in north beach. i have lived in north beach continuously since 1962. i am a native san franciscan. i have never had a drop call in

north beach. the only dropped calls happen on nob hill. i have been to three presentations by t-mobile and they have been asked why they want these ariels. -- aerials. they said they received 41 e- mail requests about dropped calls. when asked who the 41 people are, basic privacy prevents them telling who they are. that should tell you something. the fact that two of these three applications -- one has been supposedly withdrawn. we expect it will be back. the other has been postponed until may. it shows you the the argument of density, which is the reason for the discretionary review request -- you really should grant it. it is necessary to step back and look to updating the regulations

about these cellphone and tennis -- and tennis -- antennas. i would like to put this in your packet for a future possibility of the board of supervisors and yourself getting together to update the regulations. it is not impossible. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment in support of this dr request for it? seeing none, project sponsor. >> good evening, commissioners. thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. i am here on behalf of t-mobile. i have been working in san

francisco for a number of years. i have had the pleasure of working with this commission. i have been working on this specific project since mid-2009. i have with me the t-mobile council and one of t-mobile's engineering folks. we can also discussed exposure questions you may have. t-mobile identified a specific gap in coverage in the area surrounding grand avenue and greenwich street. these coverage maps were created using drive-test data gathered and compiled in the next few years. -- in the last few years. it reveals a large coverage gap in the neighborhood. t-mobile also received more than 40 miles from customers complaining about a lack of service in the area and demanding improvement. we have also received more than 400 petition signatures from residents, merchants, and visitors to north beach who

support this project, and ask the commission to approve it as proposed. i believe a number of those supporters are here to speak today on behalf of the project. in identifying the coverage gap, we set out to find the least intrusive means of filling that gap. the alternative site analysis in your packet identifies alternative sites, but also discusses why it was not feasible for a number of reasons. none of these alternatives were found to be less interested than what we proposed at this location. ultimately, t-mobile proposed to install a small micro-facility. it includes a 10 inch diameter trout that is only 5 feet tall. it is set back more than 20 feet. the design includes just one antenna. it will be minimally visible from surrounding public viewpoints.

the bank structure allows it to blend in with existing pipes on the rooftop. we've shown the photos in your pocket. -- in your packet. there is nothing extraordinary or exceptional about these visual impact. the exposure limits for the site are less than 1% of the s.e.c. limits. there are no extraordinary are exceptional circumstances here. we ask that the commission stick with mr. hollister's recommendation and not take dr. >> thank you for listening to us today. as you know, you are too exercised discretionary review with utmost constraint. we do not believe there are extraordinary circumstances. there are not any of the impact you normally would vote on in terms of noise and visual impact

that are exceptional. the neighborhood meetings we have gone to, the primary concern has been about emf. as you have heard, we are 1% of the emf standard. under federal law, that is not an area within your purview. also under federal law, you have to have substantial evidence to deny this site. that is not just general objections as you have heard this evening, but specific objections to a site that would fall under a ceqa analysis that staff has said are not there. t-mobile has shown a significant gap with coverage maps and drive-test data, which is what they are supposed to do under federal law. they shone with alternative analysis that this is the least intrusive means of filling that gap. agora hills, recently a case stated that t-mobile has demonstrated a significant gap. it shifts the burden to the

community or local jurisdiction to identify other steps -- other sites that were less. in addition, hundreds of these sites have been approved since 1997. in 2006, without discretionary review. we feel if you accept discretionary review, it would constitute discrimination under federal law. as you know, this is a very complex area. we understand the comments you have concerning the impact of these facilities. they are individual facilities. they are like a light bulb in a street light. the light up a particular area. they are unique and respond to demands that have been placed on the industry by an explosive desire for these new technologies that save lives. we have over 400 signatures. president olague: think you. we have a few speaker kurds.

-- cards. kye pom. >> thank you, commissioner. my name is jeff senti. i am a district two resident. i publish a newsletter read by 12 dozen people involved in social media, twitter and facebook. when i go up, every block is marred by these hideous things called telephone poles. it is basically a dead tree and really ugly capacitors and wires running to each person's home. children being born today will never know what a telephone pole is. children being born today will never know -- will have no understanding why anybody would ever want a telephone that is attached to the wall.

when you hear about all this social media stuff, this computer is the stuff you do the heavy lifting on. everything else you hear about is done mobley -- on mobile. we need to support the going forward. i have trouble believing some of the things i have heard today. any large, successful carrier like t-mobile would not create useless antennas. i think whoever was proposing that would not have their job very long. these things need to be maintained. they need to be powered. you see all the government expense that goes through. i think the market is work there. -- is at work there. the companies will build the towers that they need for the possible future, but remember that these are people's phones.

i have a friend who is constantly woken up at night when people texting. i go, "why don't you turn your phone off?" she says, "i can't. it is my phone. if there is an emergency in the middle of the night, that is how i will get help." people will have cell phones around their neck and hit a button. it is going to replace everything. it is very important to commerce. if you look around north beach and other places, you will see a little box with a squiggly line. you point your phone at it, and the store's web site comes up on your phone. people are ordering pizzas and deciding what restaurants they go to using these forms of social media that are connected by mobile phones. it is something san francisco has to be part of. it is something we have to plan for. we certainly do not want any

unnecessary towers. but luckily, technology has moved beyond that compact. carriers and have put antennas in place that are not even as ugly as telephone polls, yet we have the coverage we need to move forward. president olague: thank you. >> good evening, everybody. i want to start off by saying my comments to the original first opposition made. it was a very unprofessional way of working and twisting someone else's personal statement in order to inflate their own. i just want to make it known. my name is mark koviello, and i live and work in north beach. san francisco is one of the most technologically advanced cities in the world.

patrons want to keep up with this ever-changing industry. when producers make computer chips just south of us, it is inevitable that people will want to use their phones at ever faster speeds, with more ease and efficiency. the only thing holding the spec is the fact that few --holding this back is the fact that few microcell towers have been put in place. not only will people of north beach be a did, but those of the marina, the wharf, and the financial district will benefit. i support the proposed plans. i do not believe the cause any increase harm to the world, more than the world we already live in. thank you for your time. president olague: darla burnell,

elmore patrick, mike leon. >> hello, commissioners. you can pronounced it phonetically. i am a professional-, san francisco born and raised. i grew up in north beach. i just want to say that i have been to china. i have been to a lot of places in europe. i know that their technology there is next 10 compared to what we have here, because of federal regulations. i hope that one day we can catch up to them and make san francisco a leading edge of technology in terms of having sell reception in the areas i would like to have cell reception in.

i rely on it every day. when there is no reception, i am in the biggest heap of trouble because of the nature of my job. i am either looking for some type of internet connection, or hopefully my data plan works on my phone so i can do what i need to do on a daily basis. it hurts my business when there is no reception in the area. i am 35. kids younger than me right now, the next generation, are expecting to have connectivity in the city. it is ridiculous that there isn't in certain parts of the city. it is a hazard. it is a danger, in the sense that most people my age these days do not even have a land line to call services we need in cases of emergency. i hope you guys take that into consideration. san francisco is supposed to be a leading model in the world.

and we are behind already. i am 35 years old, and i expect more from the city, being born and raised here and seeing other cities better than us in certain areas of technology and what not. that is about it. president olague: thank you. mark leech, daniel hiya, regina van. >> good afternoon. mining is mark leech. i lived in north beach and worked in richmond. i wish more people speaking for the dr could live in north beach and not leave. but i have to be able to communicate with the world. i do not need a call dropping because there is not an antenna within a certain range. two years ago, it was proposed

that we have free wifi for san francisco. why didn't we? because of infrastructure. we did not have the communications ability for a company to sponsor that for the city. t-mobile is trying to do what some of the other cell companies are trying to do, established a network of antennas. these antennas put out less rf frequency of a typical police car on the street using its police radio. are we going to get rid of all the police cars because they are putting out too much rf? no. it is an inconsequential thing. we have children that need an education, children that need to communicate. we have people that need to communicate for business, for work, and for social reasons in general. how are we going to do that if we do not have a communication system?

we are talking about putting up an antenna on three buildings, an antenna that is little more than the height of this podium. if he said that back 7 feet or 35 feet, you are not even going to see it from the street. if you live across the street on the fourth floor apartment, you will have a slightly obstructed view from your dining room, but you will see other metal things picking up on the roof anyway. as a city, we need to improve our communications ability for the advances that are being made. we are g3. all of us within this group -- we'll have smart phones. we depend on g3. we need more connectivity. this is what t-mobile is proposing. this is why i say please reject the dr. please reject additional government spending on needless

investigations. thank you. >> good evening. mining is mike -- my name is mike leon. i own a retail store on grant avenue. my customers rely on cell phones. many customers find my shop through dozens of websites. wireless service is essential. the wireless devices are used a shopping tools. some customers might purchases using their cell phones. many point of cell systems are now converting to wireless systems. i hope this department will not stand in the wake of the future. i also want to talk about emergency services. i use my cell phone to make emergency calls to police in the neighborhood, whether someone is injured or drunk and passing by, or there is a street hazard.

earlier this week, the commander said many of his officers use their cell phones all the time in the line of duty around north beach. it's so fun drop would endanger the lives and the competitiveness -- a cell phone drop would endanger lives and the competitiveness of small businesses. i sent a petition around grant ave. as residents, we do not oppose this solution to better wireless communications. i personally collected these citizens -- these signatures and verified there were either merchants or neighbors within the proximity of these sites. today, i witnessed a woman and a man collecting signatures against the project, and i witnessed this from my shop. this woman and man who did not

speak a word of english signed the petition. i know this because i speak fluent spanish. when i asked if he knew what he signed after the fact, he said he did not. i asked if you lived in north beach. he told me he lived in south san francisco. commissioners, the idea of "not in my own backyard" -- we all use self and technology. i urge you to support this project. it will benefit the community of north beach. thank you. president olague: i called a few cards. fox was the last card we had, but i could not make up the first name. >> my name is daniel hiya.

i am a san francisco resident, student, an entrepreneur. i moved to the city five years ago because of believe san francisco is a city of progress. we have certain standards would have to live up to. promoting small businesses is one of those virtues that i believe san francisco stands for. it is the reason why i moved here in the first place. those who are against projects like this usually do not have very good reasons. the claim obstruction -- they claim obstructive towers. they want to think about -- the old phone calls -- phone poles back when i was younger. i have not seen any in quite a few years. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment? we do have a 6:00 time-certain item.

i think we have heard sufficiently from both, but i should have limited the time to two minutes. live and learn. >> i will be brief. my name is regina van. i have been living in north beach for a few years. i can just echo what has been said so far. we have to keep up with technology. san francisco should be a city of cutting edge technology, as far as having accessible access to the internet, as well as other, i guess, abilities to make a call. they have to have access to the internet. this particular antenna, as has been stated, is not very visible from the steep -- from the street. it is not that high in terms of visibility. i do not think it would cause any problems, in terms of, for

example, an interference with many buildings, or whatever. i am in strong favor of this. i believe that in order to move forward in the future we have to be able to compete. you have to be able to be acceptable. san francisco is a place of tourism as well as technology and silicon valley. in order to keep up, in order to go forward in this country, we need to be able to have access. we need to be able to have built devices in place in order to compete. i believe is good for north beach. i believe this will be great for business, as well as tourism. when they come, they can access -- they can call home, or whatever. [laughter] in all regards, i am saying i

believe this is a good project. i believe it would do nothing but benefit north beach. thank you. president olague: i want to encourage you, if you can keep your comments limited. people have already expressed resentment. we do have a 6:00 time-certain item. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is ron lee. my office is on power street, by green street. in my office, we do not have much coverage. i would lose coverage. i would like to touch on that. i worked for at&t for 30 years. i have worked on a lot of cell sites up there on radio road. i worked there many years, and nothing has ever happened to me. the emanation of this fl