the codes we have to go by. not us. as to safety, we are not structural engineers. this is the department of building inspection. they are the ones who have to deal with structural integrity, as they do with any building application. as to the fact that you can get cell phone coverage, please understand the vast majority of you is not your telephone were my telephone. this is about data transmission. that is pushing the need. i would ask the project sponsor if they can explain the need for this and how this place was

actually chosen by a little bit more detail. and my also explain -- and i think everyone understands this. >> one second here, to get --

thank you, commissioner miguel, the wireless -- wireless indications guideline provides seven different issues, and they read them according to 1-7. number one, the publicly used structures, for the location sites, with the industrial structure.

and there is a preference for the industrial structures with six as the limited preference. these are predominately residential. and we established the coverage gap, we are getting minute by minute information on the network. we know that data has surpassed voice and there are peak times of the day, and the usage for this are also in the packet and are early in the morning and late at night. this used to mean something when voice was the predominant use for cellular phones, and now with the mobile devices, we have surpassed the marketing fang that we referenced early on.

and we no longer use this in the marketing, because this is not relevant. we did it -- last week, i believe the commissioner said that we placed these facilities every few blocks, so that when the opponents make a reference to another place 450 feet away, this feels like a piecemeal process, and it is to the degree that each one of these requires of full permit and it takes about 18 months for us to develop this and do all of these reports, and submit to planning and in this process takes a considerable amount of time. we know whether dropped calls are, we know where we have gaps

in coverage, and so, this is a predominantly difficult place for us, in a largely residential area. there are concerns raised about the structural integrity. we're putting 650-pound antenna's here, and the building department will come out to investigate, looking at the report from the third party architectural engineer to determine if this is structurally sound. if it is not we will remedy this, and make certain that this is up to code. >> commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: my

understanding of the conditional use is that the item has to be necessary or desirable, not both. the demand is growing geometrically and telecommunications, for obvious reasons, two commissioners are using the i passed to go through -- ipad to go through the document. when i was first on the commission, none of the information was available, electronically. the usage is much higher. this is changing almost daily. there will be the need for more antennas, and as far as the city having to get involved or regulate something outside of

their jurisdiction, i believe this is a waste of time and energy. this is a federally regulated industry and they have the levels they feel comfortable with with nondiscrimination against competitors, whether or not there will be a merger in the future. and if you have problems, you should talk to your federal representatives, and a department without much more jurisdiction than we do. we would be changing providers and i think it would be counterproductive and a poor use of taxpayer dollars to set up the policy that would change within a month there so.

and a structural issue is something that we have to comment on. there are concerns about the structural integrity, and i feel members should take this up with the agency's that regulate or control the maintenance of the buildings and if you believe that this is not before us today, all of the other sites will be analyzed, seven different sites, with a case report, and there were quite a few who were analyzed. that would be my main feeling. but i would move to approve. >> this is seconded. >> you have before you --

>> to add to what he said in terms of the location, i don't know if you have the coverage, but we have these in our packets every time and i think people are quite surprised that the antennas -- i am not certain about verizon. they use different technologies covering different kinds of areas. and commented that there is another application -- this limits the coverage. this gets even worse on san francisco.

the telecommunication companies can get this. in the first place, they don't have a big range and that is why we have these multiple numbers. this is coming up in san francisco. commissioner moore? commissioner fong? commissioner sugaya. the motion passes, unanimously. you are now on item 16. case 10010 for 275 valencia street. >> good evening, commissioners. you have a request for a

conditional use authorization. this is a moderate scale neighborhood. the parcels existing service -- for the 31,000 building, 50 feet tall that will include -- the new cathedral include the underground parking garage. and the existing buildings on the northern portion need to be used with the related activities. this is with the chapel honors -- the subject is 46,000, and the religious institution will have an area of 68,961 square

feet with the proposed product. this requires conditional use authorization for these facilities hamas > 10,000 feet. the proposal was determined to be exempt with the california environmental quality act. this was not correctly referenced in the motion and i come prepared with an updated motion for the review.

the first thing -- this is on page 3. the end of the environmental language is the preamble that i have referenced. we add on page 15, that also references the mitigation that needs to be followed. there is environmental language added with the project sponsor for the mitigation measures, and this is on page 17. page 19, the condition of approval that references this program. all of the other conditions remain the same with these numbers. and this includes the specific requirements that are already included in the case back it,

and the certificate for the 40- page document. this highlights the specific requirements. the department of public comment receive public comment from only one individual who expressed concern over noise in the neighborhood. the project's sponsors responded to this with the timeline and the additional information with specific activities. they are generally pleased with the information provided, and in conclusion, there is a condition to approve the project on the basis that the project provides development compatible with the overall neighborhood character with the streak -- and parking

within the public realm. expansion of this is locating what is already active and it will not displace any other existing traffic conditions. if they have an active history within the community -- we have not received any opposition to the proposal and all of the requirements of the planning code. this concludes my presentation and i am available for any questions. >> i am jon goldman, the architect for this project. why will show you today is face to of a building that we designed in 1990.

some of these projects go on for decades. because of the fund raising issues that came up, we had to decide what will be billed -- would be built in these phases. phase #one is what is here now. this was for the administrative offices. the building and i will show you is designed in what you see now. it was designed to complete the scheme, around a courtyard. the courtyard is just open to the parking lot. the original idea is what i will show you. we are taking the same number of spaces there now, and i will show you some of this.

this is where the parking lot his right now. this completes the scheme that was designed in the 1990's. and there is a full of all of underground parking that is about the same number that is parking there now. the streetscape, you can see the existing phase one building, that has been there for 15 years. this is the tower, opposite, and the back of the building. and the back of the cathedral

and the church. these isometric drawing, they have been done quite well. this has been done for 15 years. the new building will be built soon, i hope, and it completes the scheme that was first designed in the 1990's. the style of this building will continue to the new building. do you from the alleyway. the view from the street and the new cathedral a very strong street presence. you can see this right here to the north. by now, there is a found mayor,

and this is the existing building. and you can see how this completes the scheme. the view from the alley way, we may be, at some time, asking for permission to do a mural on the wall. otherwise, this will have graffiti. we will do some murals that show street art and -- >> as long as the artist as local and they don't kill dogs. >> the view of the inside, this is nice, see? and this is the view from the other side, this is looking down

to the east. this goes outside of the courtyard. that is the basic scheme and i am happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> we may have some after public comment. and is there general public comments >> this is wonderful. i will get your number, mr. goldman and make certain that i refer people to you, because a lot of what comes fourth is not designed nearly as well. the underground parking is a great solution because it provides needed parking and i think is very important because the mission district has contact with a lot of victorian

surroundings, and the spaces that were available, the mission revival -- this fits in and it stands out for beauty. this is certainly not a factor. and this is safe for the birds, because this is not all glass. you have to be very unlucky to fly into one of these windows. i think that this is wonderful and i have been in some of the more contemporary churches and this is great. commissioner miguel? commissioner miguel: i live in

one of your projects and this is totally different as an architectural style. this is very much in the orthodox style. i did a fair amount of work for some of the russian orthodox in the cathedral. this particular church, i think it fits the neighborhood. and it certainly fits the greek orthodox style. the exterior fits the neighborhood and the interior to its greek orthodox very well. as to your ideas on the alley wall, the mural in the orthodox

church is common. there are nearly required at times, both on the interior and the exterior. with that, i would like to move for approval. >> this is seconded. >> i think that this is a beautiful building. i look forward to the murals, and this is a wonderful addition. >> the motion on the floor is for approval. on that motion? >> thank you, commissioners. you are now on item 17, a and b. this is for 2011 for harrison

street, request for conditional use. and case 2011, 2495 harrison for parking variances. we consider the conditional use request for the zoning administrator. and the all street parking there. >> we are going to propose to convert the retail space of 2000 square feet for a nonprofit community facility, with a new construction of a single-family residence. the sponsor is here today as well and can go into detail about the operations there is the applicable requirements of

the planning code, and this will create a productive community service. we see this with landscaping and private, open spaces. this is essential neighborhood character. and this is a historically significant buildings, the project will pay the impact fees. this also includes a variance request for of street parking for the new residential building. this concludes my presentation and i am available for questions. >> the project sponsor?

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i am the project spawner cook -- sponsor, the owner and the architect. i would like to knowledge the community process, the organization that has come through today. the community on 17th -- we did not know what to expect. you're not certain how your ideas will play out and how the

local community will respond. we have had overwhelming support and curiosity for what we are doing. not only from the local laborers but the design community, and people wandering by the storefront. we are not seeking to expand to a new location. to the community outreach we have a large number of people wanting to volunteer with these kinds of activities that we offer and community support. this is generated by neighbors and family and friends. this is the neighborhood we feel excited about calling home for our families. with that said i would like to give you a quick introduction. this is for who we are and trying to parse out these organizations and what we're

looking for a conditional use permit. this is a san francisco foundation that supports a number of projects with art and architecture that advances the quality -- and we create opportunities to bring people together to foster exchange and cross-pollination. we have a bicycle coalition and others. we share the open space with the mission district. the studios and the art and design collective, with these designs.

using the storefront space to work on design projects, all of these events have an open to the general public. and the events at the studio have led to many exciting civic projects. this includes the victory gardens project, the park's program and others. individuals for the city government, the artists and designers. separate organizations with unique functions with the studio for urban project share interests with my collaborator and myself and for others, by