restaurant innovates it is not a member of our group. the subway and the city have suggested that by ameliorating the situation we can survive. in fact we were told by concierges who come to the meetings and people who had the san francisco cab association is that the word on the street will get out there not to head to north beach. avoid that because it is a mess. extraction means noise and dirt; disruption of businesses in north beach. it behooves this commission to

include at least the possibility of leaving the tunnel boring machines under the ground by the pagoda palace. doesn't cost the city anything to consider the possibility of under the pagoda palace leaving the very equipment that really is not necessary to take out of the ground. you yourselves proved in 2008 the eir, it says that one of the possibilities approved and considered the city is to live the equipment in the ground. i was asked by the chinese community that you to testify in favor of the central subway, something that many people in the neighborhood were against. i'm still in favor of the central subway.

it was promised at that time that the equipment will be left in the ground. this promise to leave it in the ground was rated rated by mayor willie brown. >>: good afternoon planning committee. i am michael barrett (sounds like) i am against the project of taking the pagoda location to extricate the machinery. this is been covered in eirs until recently. i want to refer to mr. ed riskin's report (sounds like) from the mta.

we continue to make progress with the pagoda palace plan. the effort to change the retrieval site has involved a significant amount of work and a very tight timeline. a little too late to do what they're doing. with a strong supportive supervisor chu, the mayor's office we have worked closely with several city agencies including the planning department, the department of building inspection, to make the pagoda palace option reality. they forgot to consult with the citizens of north beach that will be disrupted by this extrication that has not come up until recently. i resent the planning committee even addressing this.

i represent the citizens of san francisco and especially of north beach. thank you for your time. >>: richard hamlin has already been called, lance carin. >>: my name is lance carin (sounds like), a resident of the north beach. for the information that we have received as north beach neighbors of various meanings the northernmost station of central subway is chinatown, washington in stockton. the mta is hell-bent on one, tunneling 2200 boars into north beach and two, digging a hole to pull the machines out.

this project seems to be cast in stone. mta has not provided rationale to my knowledge. the cost is far from being cost effective. using the pagoda as central subway corporation yard if you will, raise the building, put a shaft down, is fraught with instruction problems due to the water flow problem in the basement pointed out by letter from sav e muni. there are lower cost alternatives. unless this information we don't know about % leave the tunnel-boring machines buried, under the pagoda theatre or extract them

from the chinatown station. extracting them or burying them at chinatown would save 80 million dollars. by doing that it would not impact the people, residents, businesses of north beach. when you consider the use of this building for an extraction site it should be denied. i think it is an expensive project. it is disruptive. there are a lot better alternatives. thank you for your time. >>: and if further general public comment? seeing none general public comment is closed. >>: this will place you under your regular calendar. items 10 a-c have been continued to feb. 14. items 4 and 5 have been pulled.

>>: request from commissioner antonini. >> commissioner antonini: i ask for a recusal from 3110 octavia. my dentist's office is within 500 feet. i ask for recusal. >>: move to recluse commissioner antonini. >>: second. >> commissioner borden: aye >> commissioner moore: aye >> commissioner sugaya: aye >> president wu: aye. >>: so moved. >>: michelle- planning staff.

3110 octavia st., request by at&t to install fiber wire. the mail notice calls it as a northeast corner. the general language has been updated. proposed facility consits up to nine antennas. staff has received no public comment and staff is recommending approval with conditions. i am available for questions. thank you. >>: does -- have a presentation?

>>: project sponsor do you have a presentation or should we take public comment? >>: we have a couple of different sites. good morning my name is -- with

at&t. director of external affairs. joined by -- who conducted the radio frequency report. the testing and report included in your packet. i am also joined today by town consulting and colling azagerian (sounds like) project managers for this location. at&t is seeking your approval to install 12 panel antennas. under the city's wireless guidelines located at octavia and lombard.

with the america's cup anticipated traffic in that area. we have experienced exceptional growth, upwards of --. one thing will learn about the super bowl, traffic surged 80 percent over last year. between 8-9 p.m. when the lights went out, our customers used 78 gigabytes of data inside the superdome equivalent to 234 social media messages or 10 days of streaming video. 73,000 voice calls made. it is clear that our world is changing.

we have increased growth on our networks day in and day out. we are upgrading our network as you know everyday in the city and around our territory to account for those customer needs. we look for your support in approval of the site. i want to thank department staff and michelle for their time and energy spent on the site. thank you. >> commissioner wu: let's open up for public comment. ms. duffy? >>: my name is joy duffy, i lived in arena and -- area for over 50 ye in. arsi find that the number of

antennas seems to be excessive. i also don't have cable. i rely entirely as a senior with limited funds on the mountain davison antenna, i get 30+ stations. i question if i will get any reception with a 12 antennas on top of this hotel. i also have a health issue. -- i think that we should know the health issues concerned especially with 12 of these antennas on top.

i presently could not afford cable. if i lose mount davison i am in a financial situation that i cannot handle. i vote no. i thank you for your attention. >> commissioner wu: any other comment? public comment is closed. >>: one correction. >>: commissioner borden. >> commissioner borden: if you have any sort of, ms. duffy, any sort of interference at&t can get readings from your home.

if there is a new sort of radio frequency. our purview is in the planning and aesthetic issues. this is an area where we learned that because of interesting topography in san francisco antennas are needed every couple of blocks. cell phone networks were built in a way anticipating people using their cell phones outdoors not indoors. in terms of health issues the health department would be the place to go for that. at our level of review,

there were other sites and most were worse preference sites. the antennas are 56 feet above. i moved to approve. >>: second. >> commissioner sugaya: on the motion and second to approve. >>: >> commissioner borden: >> commissioner sugaya: aye >> commissioner wu: aye >> commissioner hillis: aye >>: on that the motion passes 5-0. >>: the proposal before you is conditional use permit for 1520 stockton street, on the east side near green st., and columbus avenue. consists of 9 existing antennas.

the facility is proposed in a location preference new the north beach special use district, the north beach special restricted use district, and -- staff has received a petition with four signatures opposed to the project because of health concerns. staff recommends approval with conditions for this project. >> commissioner wu: thank you. >>: good afternoon commissioners, terry -- again with at&t. joined today by -- we are seeking your approval to install 9 panel antennas,

preferred location under the wireless guidelines. stockton near greenstreet with a lot of foot traffic. it picks up a lot of traffic as you know. we are looking to seek your approval on the site. i thank planning department staff for their help. >> commissioner wu: public comment? one speaker card. daniel short. >>: my name is daniel schwartz, longtime resident of north beach, eight years software engineer and vice president of the villa

north beach homeowners association. i am confused about the intention for this facility. the public notice mentioned that is a change of ownership; nine new towers. now they look like they're moving three panels. now they look like they are installing. not sure what this is addressing. if the case is addressing installing 9 new panels - i am also a longtime at&t customer - you need to consider that. if you go to antennasearch.com

there are over 35 antennas. you should consider piggybacking. if new towers are proposed. there are also reports -- a lot of small, tiny antennas, the size of a hand with pick up 90 percent of total cell tower deployment by 2015. if you are approving at&t's control of the facility that is fine if there are existing antennas but please put in the conditions that any further towers should be approved in the same process otherwise you are getting authorization for a corporation to install additional antennas in an older infrastructure which saves money but does not take our public interest at heart especially consider the neighborhood, washington state park,

peter paul church, foot traffic, children that play, people that like to relax and read. people work there. having a lot of radiation going is an issue. if this case is to prove new towers you should deny that. in the case is simply moving these panels that is up to you but not that this is a medical service facility with chinese immigrants. i don't know that they know that they're being treated for medical issues with cell phone towers raining around them. >>: the property owner has to

consent and pay rent. the medical center, the people who own the medical center, are choosing the antennas. the other thing is this is actually correcting the permit issue. they originally filed for a permit for the nine antennas in 1992; then the building inspection and process went through but the permit expired, and signing guidelines changed. this is basically to legalize the 9 antennas; of those 9, three are being moved. this is upgrading 3 antennas, i guess. maybe ms. -- can clarify that.

it is making legitimate all 9 antennas; it is not a new addition. it is not going to change the current frequency. there are a lot of antennas. not all cell phone providers seem to have same type of antennas. hopefully that will change. for the purpose i moved to approve the condition. >>: second. >> commissioner antonini: i had a question raised in the last item that i heard when i was in the other room. maybe i could have the rep from at&t or the expert from cell phones come up and answer the question. i am not sure if it was answered during the last hearing.

there was a speaker concerned about reception. i want to know if there are any issues. if the antennas are close enough to the unit when they don't have cable, have there ever been any instances of an interference with the signal because of the antennas? >>: this goes to commissioner borden's question. the fcc allocates radio frequency bands that we are allowed to work with. we all have different frequencies along the spectrum allocated to the different carriers by the fcc. included in that there are

wireless spectrum, various tv channel spectrum, there should be no interference because they'll work on different spectrums. if she does experience we will be happy to come out and look at it and measure whether or not, maybe we will do a before and after or something. that should be no radio frequency interference with television channels. these nine panels to clarify have been on the building. we are just relocated three of those. >> commissioner antonini: i realize it is just a relocation but i use this as an opportunity to get an answer to a question that does influence a lot of people because there is a significant number of the population could does not have cable. i can speak from personal experience that if you have

cable and insulation of the cable is not thick enough you can have shadows from interference. this can occur but being a different frequencies that should not be a problem. thank you for your answer. >>: there is a motion in the second two approval conditions. >> commissioner antonini: aye >> commissioner sugaya: aye >> president fong: aye >> commissioner wu: aye >> commissioner borden: aye. >>: passes 7-0. >> president fong: we will take a seven minute break and reconvene. thank you.