amendments to the eastern neighborhood plan. whatever we know about the warriors plan it's massively inconsistent with the plan. we want you to amen the plan. i think the procedural issues need to be addressed and is seems to me in the experience of our jurisdiction and it's your jury instruction particularly on the western side of embarcadero you need to make sure that planning issues are anticipated comprehensively from the beginning. thank you >> linda chapman following up.

i received this beautiful card which i will give you for distribution saying at this sad time when something as sad as this happens there are continental less reasons we'll remember this so sorry for this. and during your presentation you mentioned that st. charles that can't be saved then a senior housing project will go in this place. you should be cognizant that seniors stay home longer and they'll peer into her windows. and essentially we have in this

neighborhood as you heard from brian cal us people feel like we're 3 of this is our demographic but the people who have lived there are older chinese families and a lot of poor kline's and moderate light term tenants and this is our neighborhood. i was very disappointed that i didn't consider sequa and overriding consideration and didn't consider the no project alternative. and methodists are disappointed this has nothing to do with the methodists. you have 3 players and i realize you're not in a position to disintangible that. the methodist congregation they

read the examiner article and said what do trees have to do with buildings. and the person who got back to town and have met with their lawyers to try to settle this to a nonprofit use a methodist church is also replaced by some kind of beneficial use. it was an a bit ration of 3 people who keeping kept people in the dark. and it passed. he's met with his board and other lawyers and they'll be trying to do something about this. now what are overriding considerations it's in sequa. you consulted the attorney overriding considerations do you need to put the university or

the general hospital or maybe other things like it couldn't be repaired but you were putting the senior housing on the half and opening up the public room for us and a opening up public space. overriding considerations are not money to be put everywhere else >> my name is david. i'm a resident in embarcadero. i want to express serious concerns about the development. i'm not a developer but i've taken time to attend several

meetings and the presentations on this project i have serious concerns with the local concerns that the resident concerns are not being dealt with. there's some planning going on to the planning, zoning code to follow and everything in this plan throws it out the window. we're - i want to encourage the planning commission to get involved or send some recommendation or someone with intelligence. we have the mta coming down and telling us they want to open that bryant street excuse me. beal street it's part of a orus project was cut off yet

necessary want to open up through traffic to the neighborhoods and parking for the entertainment business. i'm sorry i was in a building maybe 60 cars during the day and cars for the general public but they're going to come into the garage and have valet serviced. the impacts on the neighborhood go way beyond i hope the planning commission get involved. i want to see them provide the prospective. there are previous eir that went on the eir on the market that prohibited the conclusion any access on market street.

but the last version of the proposal seawall 330 has a garage and hotel. the list goes think our the giant are limited to 14 sell out events past baseball but 2 hundred and 50 events on pier thirty 32. i hope the planning commission gets involved early on rather than later on. thank you for your time. i l have a list of other concerns. thank you >> susan. next week you have a presentation on the warriors

promise for the planning department jurisdiction of 3 seawall lot 330 and piers thirty 32. the presentation we made by the architect and there will be plans on that. you have to have questions to ask and i ask i plead with you to think through this before the hearing. i'm passing out among other things or your staff is passing out how the barkley stadium it's the basketball arena. you'll note how intense the programming is. you have jurisdiction over complete jurisdiction overall the area west of the embarcadero. the port owns land but not the jurisdiction you do.

the plan that was given out the page of the eastern selma plan it was adapted before the project ended. the eir was done with data 2 and 3 of the plan. no one is looking at this as a neighborhood. it's your responsibility. you look at the sunset neighborhoods the clem street neighborhood. what about the people who live in this neighborhood. they development addition is no more it's the planning department that has to deal with this. the port has enough to deal u with but you have to deal with the west side. there is no vital commercial

area. the neighborhood will crazy about this. we don't have places you have in every other neighborhood. you have to understand your own process. i requested last night at a port hearing on transportation how the project will get through the approval process. i had the experience of 8 washington street. you'll have that on monster hearing and everything amending the project. you won't have any discussion of the project. please force it. you have the opportunity next week to start asking questions and you should ask your staff to come in with a plan and reopen eastern selma and let us know

what's happening. thank you >> hello, i'm patricia. i want to express some frustration and disappointment i've had with the enforcement section of the planning department. in my neighborhood we have a use a conditional use it has all those conditions of approval no one filed for 10 years. numerous neighbors have complained i put in a complaint about a year and a half ago. i'm being asked to be the person to go out and take photographs to confirm my complainant it t which is fine but sometimes, we get threatened by the the people. i hope given how many times

neighborhoods are asked to accept the conditions with the idea they're to be enforced that enforcement happens some of the time and when neighborhoods make the complaints get feedback. i get to go out and take the photographs and get threatened by the business drivers from school and it's important enough for my neighborhood. thank you >> when i heard linda say what she said at methodist church on larkin i moved here 31 years ago

with two children i which is raised methodist. my daughter went to chinese school in this church additional spring valley which is the oldest school in the we thought coast. i spoke about central subway the city is changing twrooft. i've seen it happen in other cities i understand change but my son had his own bowling bail. i don't know anyone who lives in the new condo complex but i appreciate linda speaking for not only the chinese but all the people in the neighborhood we

were not able to buy in this neighborhood. the city is changing too fast. i know people who go to this methodist church. i can't take my son bowling across the street. if we hadn't found the longshoreman's bank of america is in london and we're being twisted like puppets in this global finance capita so people who understand quality of life and make it a good place for the new comers we see a city where everything is happening too

fast. as a methodist i won't feel too good-looking a condo building above market rate folks aren't,of course the loks housing and it's a sister-in-law amount of folks finding homes >> good afternoon. i'm here to speak regarding the warriors stadium. that is proposed for the pier across from bryant embarcadero. i live in the neighborhood not an activist not particularly sociably activity. i would love to see moot architect building. i think what's not been take

into account the location of the arena. the neighborhood is really made up of very small streets. there isn't parking and traffic. the traffic situation is not suitable to accommodate the kind of traffic that will come through the neighborhood in addition to the events and defames at the at&t park. with the giant state and spell your name for the record that was built that was amazing and beautiful a jewel to the city we've seen a huge increase in traffic both pedestrian and auto in the neighborhood. it's fine we've worked around it but a artery like brian that's a main thoroughfare we have

gridlock at the intersections. when events let out and event before them start. so i'm not opposed to develop in the city. i'm not opposed to change i want to make sure we're considering the quality of life for the folks who live in the neighborhood and what we can accommodate. it will change the fabric of that neighborhood significantly and make the lives of the folks who live there challenging. i've only a few seconds left. i've been participating in the community action group. i've been participating in that

group i don't think we're going to come to a real solutions because we have no facts and figures to make the arena more viable. i come to you to help come up with solutions that make it more viable or a different place in the city to place the arena. thank you for hearing our comments and having the public time >> thank you. >> that closes public comment. that places you under your regular calendar. item 3 was pulled off consent to

request a continuous. good afternoon >> good afternoon. i'm teddy i'm the director of external foyers for at at we offered to try to identify some sites to work with the planning department to identify some sites to consider as an additional. the staff was helpful to help identify one location that may have a change of ownership and two a preference 7 location would be a at least preferred location because it's residential as opposed to a mixed use building. we're asking we've reached out

and made contact with both the landlords. we're still a long way to put the plan in place but we're asking for more time until after t the new year to track down the alternatives we've identified. that's what we're asking for today >> thank you. i suppose opening it up to public comment on this item >> seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner >> thank you. i appreciate the situation here and it's a little bit unusual where there's a opposition to the site and one of the things that was brought

specifying by comments was to relocate to another location in their the proposed site. an as he knows with antennas you have to be fairly close because the area you're trying to address has to have an antenna citing somewhere close to that. you have the ability to be wherein two or three blocks in various directions depending upon on the type of building. it's just a matter perhaps i'd have to check with the city attorney but i would think if it's still the same project although it's a different location a continuance would be appropriate if it's a different location it has to be a different project we'll have to, you know, allow see what the

project sponsor wants to continue or withdraw it. but the other thing we deal with the clock on this as we know from following this and it's important whether the continuance is allowed to find another site or we have to terminate this particular application i'd like to see if or it in the next thirty to 60 days. participates i can comment on my ideas >> if an application came in for a new application staff is more than willing to look at the care of alternative sites. to make sure their mower appropriately sited and a scaled for the type of installation that the project sponsor is

looking for and the community as well >> okay at the. maybe i could get a comment from the representative of at&t. what do your preference be i did ask for a continuance but the continuance you sounds like would be this particular project being continued although if you came back with an alternative site that would have to be a separate project >> thank you, ted i didn't with at&t. our first understanding that we're going to have to submit a new application are i think company at this time is not willing to forego this application. we don't have any guarantees we'll be able to reach an agreement with any other loaned in the area. this is the site that we have

but we would like to make sure that we have have an opportunity to work with any landlord that would work with us. i'll be happy to have a continuance for thirty to 60 days >> sounds like you're saying the continuance would be a place holder because if we continue this to january or early february you'll have to come back with a different project at that particular hearing. you could bring back the same project but realistically we would like to see something different saw that's; correct to reach an agreement to allow us to move forward and we'll

withdraw this application but because the negotiations can take that more than a week or two we've been trying to find out if the landlord is willing to work with us. we just need a little bit more time to make sure there is an ability to secure a new site >> so rooefk if he were to entertain a continuance what date would you need. >> either the third week in or fourth week in january. i be given the holidays and again those are lease negotiations so we want to make sure we're on equal footing with the landlord when we into enter into negotiation.

we'll push our internal mobility group to work >> that sounds reasonable to me. >> commissioners, if i may jump in for clarity in our own procures in your rules and regulations once a comment has been closed and you've taken it up to discuss the applicant can only withdraw with our consent but once you take a motion to proceed the only way the commission could allow them to withdraw would be to actually revote that motion of intent. so just procedurally. can i ask about a motion to

continue wouldn't that take precedent. you could continue the matter but at some point you have to act think the matter. in terms of you have to revoke >> commissioner moore. >> i appreciate that solid advise because the fact we're supporting a site is on the table, however, that doesn't justify keeping this further open without us making a decision. i think we had a clear vote on how we wanted to act we're looking for different kinds of attitudes regarding the installation of the antenna on certain types of building particularly those that alter

the appearances of understand. i'm not going to continue the item but support at&t to find an alternative location to create the coverage implicit we all need and support. we are together with the director's report in support to take a long time the aesthetics and visual consequences this has on the roof escape of the city. i move to approve for this. >> just to be clear our motion is to - >> modify ahead not - to came

out the disapproval. >> correct and i think it's fair to - i think we've sent mixed messages and that's been hard staff has been a couple of years on this item. in our first hearing we gave an instruction and in another meeting we went another direction. i respect their request to find another site and i recognize the nuisance in having a hand in the future site; right? and so it's not inconsistent to continue this action it still

puts on the table should disapprove should a site not be found it doesn't change the nature of the vote it changed the time and a hopefully provides additionally leverage or at&t to find another site based on our request. i'm mindful of the fact you know the staff on the commission itself has been inconsistent in the message we've delivered and i think it's important we talk about the facilitates and this is going to be more and more of an issue and we need to work with the staff to come up with guidelines maybe in conjunction with the ap c around the