that operate equipment that's not regulated by the f.c.c.. i wasn't implying that there's some difference in safety at all. it's just the fact that one is f.c.c. approved and the other is not. and the way this tier system has been proposed is there's a distinction on how each is being treated here under the tier system. commissioner borden: i don't know if it's any clearer now. >> right now there are no f.c.c. approved carriers that can fit within tier one. >> the f.c.c. is not required to approve these facilitys? >> the point we have been advancing is that in the second court of appeals case, there was a similar scheme that was struck

down because it relegated f.c.c. approved equipment to an inferior status and a more complex approval process than nonf.c.c. approved equipment. and that was just a legal situation where the court held that that particular ordinance was preempted by federal law because the f.c.c. occupies that field of operations and service. commissioner borden: and i was try ing trying to have a legal argument and i was trying to determine whether or not the impact was antennas potentially facility that are not as safe because they are not approved by the f.c.c.. >> i was not making that point. >> just getting more confusing

talking about it and the difference is different kinds of technology or different kinds of carriers that have different requirements. i did want to speak to the question about the safety and two commissioners had brought it up. we wanted to separate that issue away from this one and this legislation wanted to address noticing and aesthetic and we actually do have a sit down meeting planned with d.p.w. as well as the city attorney's office to discuss concerns about safety and seeing if there is a separate piece of legislation that might be able to address the safety concerns and we wanted to separate it out and make this legislation clear in terms of what we are trying to address and not cloud wit a series of other things and make it more complicated for the public to understand and for committees and elected officials to understand. >> thank you. commissioner antonini. commissioner antonini: thank

you. that was one of the points i was going to bring up, i think, and correct me if i am misspeak iin. the first thing that was brought up is there are already antennas on public property. what we're doing here is we're adding the regulation from the protected areas to neighborhood, commercial, and residential which expands that area and expanding the noticing and talking about tree street buffers and setting up tiers. to it's not like we're encouraging this but basically saying that since it is here already and will be used more in the future, we need regulation. and as you said, this is on the issues i just brought up not on the safety issue and not that they are not of concern and also very much of concern for private

installations, too. and that is something we want to know about and if there are hazards, we want to safeguard against them as much as possible. one other thing that came up and i think it was answered and brought up by representatives from the industry and that is that the categorizing of the sizes they have to confirm and what we are saying in the legislation if i am not mistaking it is in order to fit into tier one, you have to be in the sizes and if you are larger, you go into a tier two and then if you are larger, you go into tier three. and there are various different processes. it seems to me that it is not say i saying unless there is something i am missing, you will fit into a different category and actually having the tier one makes it simpler because those would more or less be approved as a right probably and that

makes a lot of sense to me. there is the question about the clutter issue and things will never underground would be traffic light poles. they have to be above ground to see them and the same with street lights because you can't see the light if it's underground and you may be able to put unobtrusive antennas and that is an efficient method as long as people know what is coming and are noticed. the legislation generally in my opinion looks pretty good at this point. see what the other commissioners have to say. >> commissioner moore?

>> i am strongly interested in the legislation. however, i can not separate aesthetics from safety and i strongly suggest that the safety aspects are being fast tracked and issued at the same time and the better streets plan and there is a convergence of ideas around the larger issues that address it in a more comprehensive way. president miguel: commissioner sugaya? we have a motion. commissioner borden. >> i didn't make a motion. president miguel: okay. is there a motion? >> i'll make one if that's okay. i move to recommend to supervisor avalos to continue

forward with this legislation working with industry representatives and other concerned members of the public to craft it in the best possible way and understanding that it is dealing with the issues spelled out and future legislation or concerns about the safety aspect which i think is separate from this. that is my motion. >> i'll second but i have a follow-up question to the supervisor. is the separation between what we are looking at here and your comment with respect to looking separately at the safety issue because it is based on concerns by the city that safety issues which have to deal with equipment may be preempted by f.c.c.?

>> no, i think the only reason we are planning to separate it out is there has been a lot of interest in this legislation as it stands and how we presented it. and i think unfair to folks to throw something and really substantive in importance in at the 11th hour and have the new piece of legislation. and i would rather give it the attention that it demands and have its own process and really make sure that there is a lot of opportunity for public comment. i think it wouldn't serve the public good to throw in a weighty issue so late in the game. >> i don't have any problem with it. just asking why. >> that is our thinking. president miguel: commissioner borden. commissioner borden: i am going to vote for the motion but what is frustrating is that the legislation is provide parity and means we have more hearings on wireless facilities and it doesn't address a lot of the issues that we have been discussing here at the commission on the wire leless

facilities and the aesthetic issues have work to be done on figuring that out along with the safety. >> commissioner moore, i need to clarify that this legislation and the current legislation and proposed legislation would have no impact on the hearings that come before you. no hearings or appeals that would come before the planning commission it. and this is separate from the facilities that go on private property. >> commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: my understanding is that most of this would be heard by planning staff or by d.p.w. and perhaps park and rec depending on the jurisdiction and would be rare to be involved in the hearings on one of these type of installations and not to dismiss the concerns and safety but the same issue exists on private property. and i think you have an issue to look at and not just for public installations and in fact,

probably it is more of a concern on private property than it would be on public property in the middle of the street might be less of a hazard. you have to look at that issue separate from this issue. ceremony rr there is a motion -- secretary avery: there is a motion to approve this. secretary avery: thank you, secretary avery: commissioner,

you are now on item 10, case 2010.0459c for 130 turk street. >> good afternoon, president miguel and commissioner, i'm rick crawford of department staff. this is to provide day care for up to 60 dogs on a ground floor and new ly completed mezzanine and the additional construction would add a fourth story to the building and nine residential units on the three upper floors and residential parking and that department was approved by the commission a few years ago. the project is on the north side of church street between jones and taylor in an rc-4 district. the planning code provides for animal hospitals or clinics if conducted entirely within an enclosed building. in january of 2007, the zoning administrator determined that animal clinics include dog day care facilities.

these facilities with 12 dogs or fewer are considered retail uses and facilities with more than 12 are regulated as animal hospitals and that is why this case is. you today. this is on the first floor to provide dog day care in a low income neighborhood where no such service is now available and will provide students to have pets receive care while they are at work or school. the department has received seven letters of support including one from the better alliance for the district and one letter expressing concerns and one call in opposition. the project will be required, accumulation, the project has been reviewed by the health department and they have standards that pertain to

hospitals and pet shops but say they do not have specific jurisdiction over this use. i have passed out to you and you should find a copy of the health department standards and may wish to include these or some of them in your conditions of approval. stum. the sponsor is working with details on the waste disposal system and would typically require adequate soundproofing of the building. and we have one change in our conditions of approval that i would like to bring to your attention on condition number five and i have handed out a revised condition to you. we have beefed up the noise and odor control aspects of that condition. to reflect they are not as directly involved in the enforcement as we originally thought.

the department recommendser toization as it advances the objectives and policies and meets applicable requirements and provides the desirable and necessary service to the neighborhood. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you so much. a >> thank you. project sponsor? >> i would like to say a few words about the day care. could you put my slides up? thank you for considering this conditional use application. i propose to put a district serving canine day care facility in the heart of the tenderloin between the civic center bart station. if you look closer, it is the second lock of turk -- it is the second block of turk near the golden gate theater and on that block we have residences,

parking garages, and a rescue mission. this is from the google maps. the facility was a bathhouse until the early 80's and it has been vacant since then and we are very much hoping to find the best use for this space. we want to run a well run doggy day care facility and this will be a cage-free facility to encourage socialization. we have 3651 square feet total to work with. this is from the earlier approved plan that we have for a commercial space below the second floor. we plan to create four play areas. each would be 250 to 1,400 square feet and each of these play areas would have a dedicated pack leader that would be one of the personnel that would manage the group of dogs.

the dogs would be divided by size and temperament and there would be no more than 15 dogs per play area. we have another area which would be used for the reception and another area for time-out and for feeding areas. we would also offer other supplies such as dog walking and residents in the meetings that i have talked to have brought up there are no dog supply stores so we would offer supplies in the reception area as well. this just to give you a view, this design was from the earlier approved plans for the first floor and we have an area for small dogs and an area for medium dogs and a second area for medium dog which is you can see on the first floor plan. please note these are each setback at least 12 feet from the street. so we will have a reception area where the dogs come in and will

meet and greet them, but the dogs in the play areas are back further in the back. we propose to put the large dogs in the basement and that would be in the back area of the basement and then in the mezzanine that would be the space number five which we would use as a time-out area and for other purposes such as bathing or grooming. we do want to follow the health department guidelines and the building department guidelines. we're going to be using easy to clean hard surfaces so these will be right now we have a concrete floor and we will be putting epoxy over that. it is not level. it is about 2 inches off, so we'll be putting drains on the low side so that these surface cans be hosed off and the dog waste will be washed into the city sewer system. generally there is a designated area for the dogs to do their business but sometimes they do them in other places and you really have to plan to clean the

whole place down. also if there is a problem with smell and waste, the customers don't like that and then you start losing your customers. we're going to be providing waste bags in front of the building and i would like to provide them at other areas in the neighborhood but that would encourage our dog owner customers to be sure and clean up as they're coming and going from the facility. we're also going to have the dog care workers patrol the immediate area to pick up any dog waste that our customers may have brought. and only the first floor and the basement may be used for commercial use. the second floor and above is residential per the permit that was approved several years ago. we're only doing day care. we do not have approval to do overnight or a kennel. that is not approved so this is only during the day and the floor plan, that follows the previously approved building plan. we want to minimize the impact on the neighborhood and barking

is not good social behavior and is not tolerated in well run doggy day cares. the dogs that are barking, it causes stress for some. o'er dogs and so those dogs are reprimanded and if they still keep barking then they are put into a time-out area. if the dogs become a big problem, then they will not be invited back. the building has one foot thick reinforced concrete walls to minimize sound. there is no residences on either side of the first floor and will only be doing the day care, no overnight stays. we do want to maximize neighborhood benefit. we want to reduce crime by replacing store front that has been vacant for over 25 years with a vibrant business. we want to provide a needed service for those living and working in the neighborhood and also provide eight to 10 new jobs. thank you very much for your time. i'm available to answer any questions.

president miguel: thank you. >> can we see him? >> sure. >> i am randy shaw and before i tell you why i think it's very important we support david's project, i want to thank the commission for the comments you made at the conclusion of the hearing on the cpmc about the traffic impact in the tenderloin because since you made your comments, they contacted us to find out about the little saigon plan and your comments have influenced the whole debate. president miguel: thank you. >> if you know that block of turk, not the easiest place to attract businesses. that place was the old bulldog bass and i tried to encourage

david and i think he's going to rename it the bulldog bass which fits in with the tenderloin historic district but that is a space and a block that has been getting a lot better. across the street they have painted the buildings and they are beautiful and aunt charlie's, another classic landmark across the street and that one site has been a real problem for 25 years and you saw the photo. and so this seems like a great use to me because we don't have this in the neighborhood and what may surprise you in the tenderloin is how many people are walking dogs. there are a lot of dog owners and in the hotels there are a lot of people with companion animals and we have a lot of so this is a good use and the jobs creation and dave has got a great spirit and we need to encourage more people like that to inñwe need to encourage more people to invest. i have heard various concerns about noises.

it is pretty rough right now. this is going to be a big improvement. i would encourage you to support the project and send a message we would like to invite more business into the neighborhood. >> thank you. is there an additional public comment on this item? public comment is closed. >> i want to test myself on my ability to understand the plans for the facility and, and i would like to ask the applicant how he would describe parking is not acceptable behavior, when the only language dogs speak is barking?

will you please explain that to us? >> dogs have many ways of communicating besides sparking that are acceptable. she is tugging on me. there are other ways of doing it. if you have ever seen dogs laid down low to the ground with their front paws, which means they want to play. if they nicked slightly, that is susceptible, but parking is stressful to the other dogs, and in a playground situation, it is not preferred. even in a playground, when the dog started barking, it usually sets things off. the dogs will run together. there are other ways that are a little more subtle. >> you have 60 dogs, and i am

sure you cannot watch them individually. when one dog barks, he will have time out. i find the psychology of of a big facility difficult to understand, and i would ask you, what qualifications do the people you trying to hire have with the psychology you have with large numbers of dogs. even one person with five dogs on a leash is having a hard time. you are now doing this with 60 dogs. how do you see that as happening? >> there are two questions. the first one is how the you have 60 dogs.

you divide it. one person manages no more than 15 dogs. you are not going to have one person or to cripple -- two people try to manage $60. you can have colleges with 1000 students, but they are not all in one class. 15 is a standard the industry has. >> i looked at the space. i find it very frustrating. they are very small, and since

it does not have any light, i did not even seen natural ventilation or daylight in the areas you identified. i would think that creates a facility that is less desirable than smaller facilities i have looked at where there is at least light and air. >> let me answer a question about qualifications. there are certifications where people can be certified for taking care of dogs. we will do that to try to have a certified nurse situation. the space we have is wonderful. we have a large window in the back and in the front. we would love to have an outdoor space, because that would be

best for the dogs, but that is not allowed. it is over 3000 sq. ft. of space. it is a good amount of space and very high ceilings. even the basement has high ceilings. >> do you have the qualifications people need to work with those dogs? do you have them so you know who you will be hiring? >> i have been educating myself about it. i will not be the manager myself, but i will be hiring someone more qualified than me to do that. i will get this started, but i will hire someone with more credentials than myself. >> while i a agree with you, it is very important, and there are many people in the tenderloin who do have dogs.

many of them to have animals in their rooms. that is correct. i would be interested in in what see structure you would-be suggesting. how will they be able to benefit from this when they barely can take care of themselves? >> that is a good question. we want to have a balance. we want to charge enough fees so we can pay good wages and have good people taking care of the dogs. we would probably charge the same seas are competitors charge and what the market will bear, but we have come up with different ideas for special rates for people in the neighborhood. it is more of way of trying to control that, so one idea is if

somebody is on snap, someone else has already qualified that, and they have our card. we are not going to have social workers, but we would be able to give a special rate to someone with a card. another thing, if someone is homeless and tries to interview for a job, we would like to take care of their dog. we can tell who really is going out looking for a job. the other is saying is if they can show they are on unemployment, that would be another program we can put in place. the same thing