street as proposed. on that motion -- commissioner antonini? commissioner borden? commissioner fong? commissioner miguel? commissioner moore? president olague? commissioner sugaya? thank you, the item has been approved as proposed. we're now at commissioner's questions and matters. item number 5 is for your consideration, a draft of the hearing scheduled for 2012. i send the schedule to each of you electronically. >> i do not have it. >> so you did not bring it with you? >> no. >> madam president, you did receive this last friday electronically peter thank you. i just wanted to acknowledge that. president olague: we did receive it. >> because you do not have it, the city attorney will make copies and bring it up. i ask that we delay this item until after item 6 or even after

directors report, to allow you a chance to get caught up. president olague: ok. >> thank you. item number six. are there any other commission matters? commissioner antonini: thank you. i want to think the housing action coalition for forwarding a reprint from the "new york times" of a very interesting but for the review of a book, the history of suburban corporate lans good speed of the oft -- the author is from san francisco, luis mosingo, professor of landscape architecture and environmental planning at you see berkeley. what is really interesting is the history of how we got into the situation we're in in the first place, with the first, i guess, business part of being 1942 when at&t and bell telephone moved some of its offices from lower manhattan to somewhere near new jersey, and that was the beginning of a trend that happened over the

next 70 years or so, which is unfortunate, because in addition to the environmental waste in the using of private agricultural land, it also does some other really negative things. is segregates these people from the rest of the community, because they basically, if they do not get there by automobile, they cannot get there, and they do not leave the place their working hours, because the cafeteria is there and there's no place to go. sidewalks and auditing connect these to any other place where you can go. so you use the civic connection you have in cities with shopping, housing, recreation, and transportation. it points specifically to various places, certainly with reference to silicon valley. some of the silicon valley business parts, but also bishop bart and the is day is a classic example. but that did very poor land use, because they spread out what could be condensed into one city block over acres and acres over what used to be prime farmland.

the other suggests a number of different things we can do and is certainly help to stop federal and state governments from paying for new highway extension to make these kind of business parks and other development of agricultural land possible. and also, at least required ones that exist, to make connections between these parks to the nearest housing and near a town so people can take transit there, what they're, bicycle there, not necessarily have to go by automobile, and perhaps even patronize those areas of little bit more. third, which i think is a key point, provide favorable tax treatment for businesses that locate within established urban areas and perhaps even have an extra tax for companies that should choose to promote further sprawl into suburban areas. and this is also true, to a large degree, for sports and

entertainment complexes, and we have all seen the great success with at&t park and how people get in and out of there pretty easily double that very easily, and it is a fabric of san francisco and the entire bay area. although candlestick is much maligned, last sunday in many times, i have walked from the t- line to candlestick, and easy half mile walk, as is the case with caltrain. many people take buses. i notice probably 20% or more actually use public transportation to get in and out of games, which would not be the case to be built some complex in the middle of nowhere without any public transportation. anyway, that being said, i think that is a really good article and hopefully we can begin to influence sensible public policy in regards to relocating business into urban areas and helping the environment and

also, you know, helping to end terming the -- people to intermingle with each other and not be so isolated. commissioner miguel: yes, just to tier of of commissioner antonini's comment on the other thing that business parks do is they have all of these fleets that are exclusive to particular businesses. there's no cooperation among them. they all offer roughly the same route. and it just clogs things even murder -- even further. aside from that, in the past week, i had discussions with people regarding geary brt, if that ever comes to pass. the item on our calendar today, the at&t towers on 14th avenue, some of the aspects of america's cup and the project that is

proposed for the old site at california and hyde. president olague: i just wanted to ask that we close the meeting, and in honor of michael goldstein, he was an activist in the lgbt community, and he watched our broadcast here all the time and spend a lot of time educating me, at least, on issues that pertain to the need for affordable housing for different low-income communities and medical cannibus issues as well -- medical cannibis issues as well. it was a huge loss. he passed away last friday. i would like to close in his memory. commissioner moore: i assume that everybody has read in the paper that the w hotel filed an appeal on the museum.

and on another point, the aia is created website to connect tall projects with architects and investors bid aren't up that was a very interesting thing, actually a nationwide thing, and i thought that was projected to give people an ability to really look at what is on the board and what might be part of financing. i think it creates a message in regards to them being active on that. >> thank you. madam president, do you want to go back? president olague: yes, lets discuss the calendar. >> item number 5, consideration of the dalton -- adoption of the proposed calendar hearing schedule of the planning commission for 2012. the draft shows my verbose

calendar for you. i have a couple of questions that i am not sure of for august 30 and november 29, but with that, the matter is before you for your consideration. president olague: i would just may be said that i would flip -- we can discuss this, obviously. but i would actually keep the august 16 meeting and cancel the august 30, because it is the fifth thursday. that is expected. clearly, we can discuss it. there are going to be people who are going to go on vacation, and the board obviously takes a break. but it was really hard on the calendar this year. there were a lot of items that had to be moved off because of that three-week break in august. if we could avoid that this year, we should limit it to two weeks. also, russian shanna was something that we shall make sure that -- what day is that? >> i think we are ok on that.

commissioner antonini: i would agree. i think that there are times when we're busier than others, but generally speaking, it is hard to keep continuity, and there are instances where meetings become very long if we had to recessions. i would also think that we would want to add the thursday, the 29th, which is the fifth thursday, but we are off the week before because of thanksgiving. because of the change on the calendar, it limits us to only two sessions in december. so we would be off a lot at the end of the year. historically, we have always had a lot of items at the end of the year for a variety of reasons. so i just think, you put them on their, you can always take them off, but you cannot add them back. in the fifth thursdays, the 29 indeed 31, we would take that up

as needed. if we are very busy, we could always at the sessions. but that would be my recommendation. >> i think you combine two things there for me. you are actually asking that would put back in the -- november 29. commissioner antonini: right, and i agree with president olague is that we at the 16th and have our high is the last two weeks of august. >> ok, thank you. commissioner moore: since this year, the august days fall differently from last year, i would suggest that we do not use august 16 as a day off but leave it, because we are really eroding the calendar in the manner that we are having significantly fewer meetings than what we need to do our work properly. that includes the comment on never 29, i do believe that --

on november 29, i believe that since december is so short, we need to add november 29. president olague: i can respect the people go on vacation and will not be here in august. and that is fine. there will be fewer commissioners. but i can tell you, we struggled along with the calendar last year. in a three-week lot in august really caused a lot of challenges. we had to continue so many items because of that three-week block. i hope we consider including august 16. that gives two weeks. if anybody wants three weeks off, there's nothing that prevents them from doing so. commissioner miguel: i would agree with including meetings on august 16 and november 29. to my knowledge, and linda can correct me, the commissioners

have been very, very good in and notifying her of their particular personal schedules, so we were always assured a quorum without a problem, and we do not have a quorum problem in a long, long time. in my memory, actually. so i think we're quite all right in doing it this way. commissioner antonini: do we need to move a motion to adopt the calendar? i would move to adopt the calendar, as proposed, with the changes that adding that there is a, august 16 and thursday, november 29. >> second. president olague: thank you. >> commissioners, with that motion of adopting the draft calendar with the modification that we add back in as a hearing date, thursday, august 16, and thursday, november 29.

on that motion -- commissioner antonini? commissioner borden? commissioner fong? commissioner miguel? commissioner moore? president olague? commissioner sugaya? thank you, commissioners. calendar for 2012 has been adopted. commissioners, we're now at directors reports. directors announcements and a review the past week's events at the board of appeals, board of supervisors, in the historic preservation commission. >> thank you. three announcements from me today. one is that at long last, our communications manager will be on board in about three weeks, by the middle of january. we had cleared the necessary arrangements to hire her, and we're pleased will be joining us at long last. second, in your packet that you will receive this afternoon is a memo on the budget. we're at that moment already where we're starting the budget process. seems like we just ended, and we

are starting again. in fact, we just ended. the memo is kind of looking at year to date, this fiscal year. it covers the data we have, which is the first four months of this year, and looked ahead to how we are doing for the current fiscal year. you will be having a series of hearings early in the year, including your first meeting of -- on january 12, when we will be starting the budget discussions for next fiscal year. there, and a reminder that, like last year, the department's primary offices will be closed during the holiday week, december 26, the permit counter will be open, as well dbi's, but the actual department offices will be closed for that week. that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> good afternoon. i am from the planning department staff, here to give you your weekly update on the board of supervisors activities as they pertain to planning and land use.

the land use committee heard a hearing on the status of formula retell this week. it was a request from supervisor mar on iger the formula retail stores in the city, and he wanted to hear the impacts on our small businesses, neighborhood, workers, and the economy. the supervisor provides it -- wanted an updated report share earlier this summer. this report contains information on the definition of formula retail, the history on the legislation and how it has been changed since 2004, and the information on the number, type, and results of formula of retail permits since that time. staff in the small business commission spoke on the economic impact of the chain stores versus local stores, as did a number of committee advocates, including representatives from locally-owned hardware stores, pet stores, and a group called san francisco locally-owned merchants alliance, sloma.

there were speakers from outside sentences go, employees from walmart in a group called save our walmart, seeking living wages for these the police. some members of the public questioned both the appropriate ness and the message white -- by which they live in the consideration of formula regional concentration in neighborhood commercial district. the committee members were really interested in the maps that were provided, showing where formula retail and then approved. supervisor cohen expressed sentiments in support of economic equity, and she seemed to be seeking certain formula retail opportunities within her district. . mar said they should be sensitive to local stores and

businesses and that the issue is ripe for read visitation. supervisor mar will be asking for a steady and economic impacts of this in the future but the hearing was concluded without action and continued to the call of the chair. there were a couple of appeals on the tuesday board of supervisors meeting i want to share. the first was an appeal of the conditional use authorization for a wireless antenna on a church on larson street. it was approved on september 22 of this year. the question was on the necessity and desirability of the installation. they claim the preference at one location site was not the best location for these antennas. and a better location would have been summer in the polk neighborhood commercial districts. after hearing materials presented to the commission, stabbed explain that public sites such as this church have been the city's first preference

for antennas since 1980 -- 1996 but the hearing, appellants claimed that open dbi enforcement complaints should have presented the issuance of the cu, and staff checked with the deputy director of enforcement and inspections at dbi, and we're were assured that there were no active violations or issues warranted. the appellants then compared at&t's coverage maps presented to this commission, which showed some coverage gaps in coverage gaps shown by at&t's marketing arm, which showed good coverage. after public comment from the district supervisor and board president, he asked planning staff about the conflicting information. staff described that these maps were not specifically presented before the planning commission for your consideration. but that this commission has found at&t's coverage maps to be compelling.

the board than rigorously questioned at&t about their coverage maps. supervisor wiener wanted to reject the cu but to approve a new one with the condition that planning staff take an intent -- big an independent state licensed engineer to evaluate the coverage in the area. planning step is to consult with both the appellant and the project sponsor on the selection. and a potential consult would have to sign a confidentiality agreement that was acceptable to at&t. if it is evaluated at the gap would be improved by new antennas, the cu will be approved also. if there is no gap or the gap is not approved by the installation, the antennas will be disapproved. at&t will fund the costs charged by this independent evaluator to with that the many conditions, the board voted 8-3 to approve the cu. the other appeal with the appeal

of a subdivision at 1138 k street that planning issues revolving around a number of units of the property and whether review had been completed. in this case, there were two units, but only one permitted residential unit and one permit commercial unit. the appellant claim that the rigid of residential units, the party should have gone through the condo conversion lottery prior to the subdivision map approval. staff informed the board that since the property was a single- family dwelling unit with one commercial unit and not two residential units, the subdivision was permitted a step presented evidence that ceqa had been performed twice on this permit. once for the building permit and a dr that was to be before yuba was with -- but was withdrawn. and the same for the subdivision. the bar -- the board voted 11-0 to uphold the subdivision. there was one piece of new legislation on wanted to share with you.

supervisor elsbernd introduce an amendment to the planning code that would allow automobile sales for rental in a neighborhood commercial s districts as a conditional use. that concludes my report. i did hear from the zoning administrator that there were no items at the board of appeals or no action on items at the board of appeals, i guess i should say. commissioner borden: two questions. first about the at&t conditional use. i am a little confused. it is going to go forward, that there will be this evaluation on top of that? >> yes, sometimes this commission will approve the project, but you will not be quite satisfied with the design, so you'll ask planning staff to continue to work on the design with the project sponsors. in this case, the board did approve the cu, the it is contingent upon this additional work. >> what, if anything, and i know that the supervisor is here, but

this is an ongoing issue that we have, and i think that -- great for this neighborhood, i suppose, but it is not a real answer or a problem to the larger issue, and we have antenna on the calendar today. i guess, i want to know if any conversation happened about the broader issue and how the board might want to deal with it? >> at this hearing, there's no discussion -- i believe there was no -- the super buzzer can correct me if i am wrong. in previous hearings, there have been in discussions, suggestions by least three supervisors that the current review process is inadequate and should be revisited. >> i might also add, at the risk of linda's asking me to cool it, we have been talking to the department of public health and the department of information technology about their involvement on these issues. the two issues that seem to be

of most interest are health issues and coverage issues. >> excuse me, for those of you at the table over there, your conversation is being -- is interrupting the process. can you take your conversation outside? can you take it outside and help him? thank you. >> the two issues that come up a lot our coverage issues and health issues, neither of which the department of planning is equipped to deal with. we are organizing discussions with those two departments to ask if -- ask their assistance on the matter, and whether it is only the visual issues, only the issues that we can deal with that our department level. we're discussing alternative methods of approving the towers as well. commissioner borden: the other question was about

neighborhoods. what does that apply to? >> that district is actually one of the few that is oriented towards automobiles. it is shopping districts. there is it a little shopping mall like portola. i know that is the ncs area, and we will bring a map when we hear that item. commissioner antonini: on the discussion of formula retail, did supervisors have reports from staffer from outside consultants on the issue? >> we provided the same report to the board that was provided to this commission. other folks discussed economic impacts, but i do not believe anyone provided an economic report at this hearing. supervisor mar will be asking for such a report to be completed in the near term. commissioner antonini: i should remember this from the

presentation, but was there any mention of the dollars that go outside of san francisco to formula retail that does not exist in san francisco, and this is often a factor that is not discussed but sometimes, for one reason or another, people want to go to various formula retail either for products or price points, and if they have to drive out of san francisco, they will do it to get that establishment. >> i do not believe that was brought up. commissioner antonini: that is ending at thing we need to consider when we discuss the whole thing. >> please do not force the door to close. it will close automatically. thank you. you can put your cards on the rallying here. thank you. commissioner miguel: yes, the formula retail discussion, i

have discussed this with both supervisors, is there any comment regarding the bank exclusion or anything regarding the definition of so-called drug stores? >> the banks were brought up by planning department and staff. supervisor mar asked us to discuss it. but i was surprised that, other than planning the promise that, i do not hear other mention of that issue. commissioner miguel: ok, thank you. >> commissioners, the historic preservation commission met yesterday. there were a number of items on their calendar. most of them were pretty routine. just three items i want to bring to your attention. they had a certificate of appropriateness for 940 growth street, leveling lee called the painted men. -- lovingly called the painted

the abottabad commissioners expressed that they were not overly wowed by the proposal before them. part of the conversation included comments that they could be differentiated in three proposals, and the three buildings could be differentiated in the exterior painting. the design of the center windows, they definitely wanted the roof overhang on the north side set back by 3 feet. they wanted the garage color to not be painted gray. with those suggestions and a few others, they did approve it. they also heard the proposed legislation on building futures, floor-area ratio, parking, and

compliance by use the districts, something coming before you. the had a very robust discussion of the item. ultimately, they agreed to continue the item to a later date. , but it did direct staff to write you a letter with some of their comments. the last item was discussion on the extension of the f-line streetcar service. they also directed staff to write a letter indicating their support of that proposal. but they did want to point out that they wanted to have particular attention to platform design and landscaping, as well as some other issues. that concludes my report. president olague: thank you. >> you are not general public comment. it has a 15-minute duration. members of the public may address you on items of interest to the public better with in the

subject matter jurisdiction of this commission, with the exception of agenda items. those may only be addressed at the time they are reached on calendar and not during this category. however, each member of the public may address you for up to three minutes, keeping in mind that the entire category has a 15-minute time limit. i have one speaker card. madam president, before you call this person, i want to remind -- never did that is on this wall, you kind of gather round the door. you create a fire hazard by doing so. we have a member of the public who is in a wheelchair or scooter, and when you convert great -- congregate over there, you create a barrier. if there is an emergency, people cannot get out. so either come to the other side or stay in your seat. one of the two. >> linda chapman.