president olague: thank you. any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is close. -- closed. come up to the mic. no worries. >> we are verizon wireless users. [unintelligible] >president olague: can you give us your name? ok. >> [unintelligible]

that is my comment. president olague: is there additional public comment? public comment is closed. commissioner miguel: this gives

me an opportunity to let everyone know that all the material says so, people don't always understand that all of these applications go to the department of health for clearance. prior to coming to us. they have to qualify for the federal guidelines. i realize there is a lot of concern in the community, and i appreciate that concern. but the place to voice that concern is that the department of health and the health commission. not here. it starts there, and that is where, in my opinion, have those concerns should be voiced. in particular, you're looking at installation that has been approved by a hospital.

a medical office building. even the city, to some extent has done something similar. there is a parking garage directly across the street that services the general hospital and has two largest air towers. these structures are multiple and test. the hospital and the city health department have not objected to this. as i say, this is the wrong venue. and with that, i would move to approve. >> on the motion to approve with conditions. commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. commissioner miguel: aye.

president olague: aye. >> so moved. it passes unanimously 5-0. that places you on item 15. request for a conditional use authorization. >> we're presenting on behalf of sarah. the request is for a conditional use authorization to allow the installation of nine panel antennas and associated equipment cabinets on the roof of the city owned for story public parking garage that contains a post office in the ground floor. the property is a through lot honda north.

it is located to the west end of a commercial real-estate company located to the east. with the child development center, it is located approximately half a block to the southeast. the antenna would be constructed about the existing elevator penthouse to a height of approximately fit -- 60 feet above grade. to approve the conditional quality, it would be a screen of synthetic material that is radiofrequency transparent. the maximum dimensions of the proposed antenna are approximately 4 feet 3 inches high of 11 inches wide by 5 inches thick. the associated mechanical equipment cabinets would be screened from view.

the property is a preferred location since it is a publicly used structure. at&t requires -- they conducted their required community meeting in january at a nearby restaurant. six members of the community attended the nihon -- attended the meeting. some concern was raised regarding the visual impact of the antenna. community interest grew over the next few months and they have a second committee meeting on july 12, 2011 at the recreation center. according to the project sponsor, five members of the public attended this meeting along with staff from the

supervisor's office. the concern raised with the -- what was the impact. although what expressed concern that the insulation would block their view. as of today, the department has received letters from 17 individuals at the golden gate valley of position. health-related effects of the proposal, the creation of an end to the farm. the obstruction and the negative effect on property values. the department has also received a petition of individuals living in the neighborhood in opposition to the project. the department has also received a petition with business operators from the area and beyond and support for the project. the department believes the project is necessary or desirable for the following

reasons. the project complies with the applicable requirements of a planning cut and is consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan. the project is consistent with the facilities siting guidelines and his the preferred location. it will provide the cellphone coverage in an area of the currently receives for coverage. the approved a conditional use with provisions as contained in the draft motion before you. president olague: project sponsor? >> the afternoon, members of the commission pinhead i am here today with representatives from the lessons professional engineers and conducted the

radio frequency testing the as part of the packet. i'm also here today with our side acquisition manager responsible for this site. we're here today seeking the approval of the antenna located at lombard street. we have the and tell us the r six with the penthouse and screamed, additional equipment will also be located on the roof, shielded from view. they can close a significant service staff in the area and is also explained in more detail. i believe counsel provided some service maps and information to show the coverage and capacity gaps in the area. i will not go into details about the january 25 meeting in the

july 12 meeting. we did voluntarilysecond meeting of where there was concern that we were competing with obama and the press coverage, so we held a second committee meeting in tried to address concerns that the community had at that time. we have the site acquisition team as well. we also have reached out as we do in these situations to the school district. there was concern that the residents had raised about us being too close to a school. we reached out and conducted a second site has just for the measurements. and really what we found was that the commission's were at 0.012, and there are all sorts

of numbers, 1.8% of the applicable limit for exposure of unlimited duration by the general public. less than 2% of the federal standard is in been near the school of those. they did not raise any concerns, but we did reach out to them because it was brought to our attention. with that, we are seeking your approval today on this conditional use permit and we think the department staff and ask for your support. >> a couple of speaker cards. you can come up in any order.

>> i have some storyboards for the supervisors to see. my name is christina and represent the team that is totally against having the antennas and the pieces of equipment on this particular location. we are for it, but would you move it one block down the street? we feel it is not a good place for it. how to thank -- i want to thank commissioner miguel for returning my call during the recovery period. there is nothing i can say that you need repeated. they don't always give proper notification, and they give it to the health department. they waited from november to the end of january to notify the neighborhood. we feel like we should have

known before that. at&t already has a five-year plan within the area corridor. each of the neighborhoods over and over will have to come before you for the locations that they choose. we just want you to move it down the street. we have the support of the majority of the parents and they do not want it at that location. we also feel that they will not simply limit themselves to just what they are saying to you today. we have seen this happen where it has become an industry, and we feel they could certainly apply for things in the future. at&t -- they have painted the

elevator and the area to the left were the refrigerator equipment will be in danger ready. prior to that point, there was no pain whatsoever. we feel that they are acting ahead of the hearing in the head of the conditional use permit. the earthquakes happen, buildings fall. the pieces could fall into the alley in the play yard. we have the expected big earthquake that will be happening soon. there is no unusual condition that says this will stand and hold the equipment has not hold the residents in the surrounding area. the valley itself is traffic from the post office. the people taking shortcuts through this valley.

[chime] may i have a few extra minutes? president olague: everyone is allowed three minutes to speak. i did have a couple other speaker cards. >> i live approximately 300 feet from the proposed site. i was at both meetings. i think one problem here is the height problem. at&t says they are putting on top of the building, they're putting on top of the elevator appear in how many more feet? the building is four stories. you have a high dakota and all the sudden, who changed it?

at&t says that planning is fine. it is the right height. how could that be? it blocks of the entire golden gate bridge. but that is only my view. and all of my other neighbors from the roof, that is the only access i have to the outside. never mind that we have 420 signatures of registered voters in the very small area that says no, we don't want it. the thing they are a little bit off on the handwritten letters. i know for a fact that we turned in 18. i think they are more like 25 to 20, somewhere in there.

i have at&t. my cellphone works fine. i have broadband and it works fine also. i can take my computer across the street and one block behind me, and my laptop works perfectly at my friend cozy house. they're also taking away for parking spots. i thought the city was big on parking. so besides blocking the view of every person on the roof, we're at the very low end, there is nothing else of of us. we are at the bottom of the valley. every roof deck is being blocked. i still say they have a high cut. when did they change into? they say they don't because they talked to the planning department. i say there is a high cut, and i don't want in.

and neither do 420 other registered voters. thank you. president olague: any additional public comment on this item? >> 136 of those signatures are from the parents. we have a situation at the school, and the middle of the marina that is considered elitist, that we have never complained about the 80% of the constituents are on disability fixed incomes. no. 2, hawkins there, yes, they are not normally sick kids. searle palsy, multiple sclerosis, severe artisan.

i come from a family that has won with severe autism. he is 35 years old, 250 pounds, and blind, deaf, and autistic. it is not easy for parents to handle these situations. and there is no place for these kids to go. your commission, three times before has said to put them on the fair street garage. you can't take a chance, regardless of what the health department says. it is a very serious issue. this is communications for the future. that may not be because of the studies coming out. it isn't as recently as last month. but what disturbs me is that i

asked the enough for the study, not the summary, but the study behind the summary. they refused to give in to us. you talk about the health department, but the planning department, their summaries are accurate, too. i am very concerned on this issue. if you have ever had a child do not look out of alternative sides to make this a viable project. they made at the study's for either side and that disturbs me. why would they not give as the studies surprises me. harley looking at what we are really getting? it is up to you, and these kids

we can't take a chance with. president olague: public comment is closed. commissioner miguel: i believe the project sponsor says that the person that handles site selection is here. if they would come up for a moment? there has been a question as to this location as opposed to the garage. comment? >> i am the project manager. i'm not the engineer, just to be clear. site selection will depend on

the coverage area and a defined the search area. in this particular case, we are looking to cover roughly a four by four block area. it was bounded by chesnutt, her, and buchanan. it is one block west of steiner. in order to accomplish that area, we have to have a located search rain. it brings us to the subject and bloc of lombard street. if we were to place it all the way over, we would not be able to cover the area that the engineers have defined. does that answer question? commissioner miguel: there was a

question asked about high. this is allowed by code to go 25 feet above the height and let. it is 40 feet. this would be a at 65, and this is at 60. other than that, looking at the materials of the neighborhood association, from the petition which was referred to the school, i appreciated the fact that the project sponsor did actual testing for academicians at the school. the only thing i can say is what i just said on the last item. you're talking to the wrong department and the wrong commission.

it gets a health department review before it comes to us. and we accept their recommendation for their non- objection, and with that, i would move to approve with conditions. commissioner antonini: i don't see much of the distinction between this and the previous case. distances are probably closer. they are right on the facility is not a parking garage, a distance from child care or school facility. an additional test was done, and we cannot base our approvals on

it yet as long as the determination is made that it is within 114 emissions and it seems to be on the very low and based on a second test. there has been 8000% increase in use, and my office is not far from there. much of the population lives on their cell phones or various electronic devices. it will have to be somewhere. it was pointed out that the drug would not be in the center of the area that they are trying to recover. this is a public structure, and mention was made of there being a form. each particular installation comes as a separate installation. if another one came, it could be a point that could be brought up at that time, that we are trying to put too many on and it is becoming a farm. there is concern about

earthquake and seismic issues regarding the tower. it is to the south of the structure and looks like this tower is on the northwest side. if it were to fall and an earthquake, it would fall into lombard street or fall on to the parking garage. it is not close enough to fall. i don't think that it would be a concern. so i would have to be in support of this based on those points. commissioner sugaya: first, to the audience. the city views are not protected in terms of issues that come before this commission. i don't know if people know that, but we have had lots of cases, not necessarily so phone antennas, but height increases

and other things were people have complained that the view is going to be blocked. it is not a consideration for this commission. secondly, a question to staff. the coverage maps that we received are fairly uniformly coded. it is ready for not very good coverage. yellow is usually sort of a coverage but it isn't great. green is indicated in those areas where coverage is fairly good. and we usually get maps that show the existing condition and what happens after the end had a dozen. the language is not all exactly the same. verizon uses yellow to mean marginal coverage.

at&t uses the service-under high demand periods. verizon and at&t, are these maps the same? as far as the department is concerned? >> that is my understanding. president olague: i call a question. >> on that motion. commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. president olague: aye. >> so moved. it passes unanimously 5-0. you are on item 16. request for a conditional use

authorization. commissioner moore: would you call it by name please? >> mycology's. -- my apologies. president olague: is a staff person available? ok, great. >> the afternoon, commissioners. it before you is a request for a conditional use authorization to allow wireless transmission facility