commissioner antonini: thank you. there are two other things and one talked about this is in my opinion looking at the rendering of the aesthetics and i don't think they standout. in fact, a couple of one site looks like they are art deco elements in keeping with the building when it could be -- when it was built that way originally. and i don't find them to be unsightly, but certainly that is a factor to look at and the other thing is that the owners of buildings that were installed and paid for that and using the building and receiving the easement and there is a

companiation which is only proper. and i did not need to install an antenna, i would not pay somebody money if i didn't need to have it and it seems intuitive there is a need for it and not just spending money to be spending it. and that was the other thing that was brought up and i don't know if there's any need and i can move to approve that. >> second. president olague: no, sir. commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i am still curious as to whether or not we are going to have the institution speak to the neighbors first. as i said earlier, i don't know, but i think there is a part of communication missing here which i would request. >> commissioner fong? commissioner fong: i understand that thought.

and maybe i can suggest an addition to the current motion that at&t reach out in the proper manner or the landlord to explain to the neighbors within a radius how to apply for testing and neighbor done so. force >> we have done some communication and we would be happy to do that again. commissioner fong: i think this may be a continuous problem and i am sure you have a linguistic team assigned to it, but obviously there are gaps in the way it's being done now. commissioner moore: and with that recommendation coming from you is very important to me because you yourself might be the point person to follow up should somebody from the institution have questions or think about the way that we are really very, very strongly supporting the hospital no all the parts and pieces and want it

to be a close neighbor and the people part is equally important and i don't want that to pass by and if you would volunteer if that is appropriate to do that for all of us and i will personally appreciate that. not wanting to task you here, but this is a difficult situation and our position here is to hear the public and act upon it and that is what i am trying to do for us without hindering the approval that i think the majority of the commission is supporting. >> right. and clearly not everybody got the message here. commissioner fong: i would be happy to work with at&t a little closer. commissioner moore: thank you. >> i would offer to call the director of the hospital as well since we are working with them on the master plan and the e.i.r. i am happy to talk to them or commissioner fong, we can speak. >> thank you.

secretary avery: commissioners, the motion on the floor is for approval, on that motion. [vote taken] secretary avery: thank you, commissioners. the motion passed unanimously. commissioners, you are now on item 15, case 2011.005c, 300 columbus avenue. >> and macro wireless telecommunications service operated by the at&t mobility and the current installation would incluz nine antennas and the equipment cabinets that will located in internal storage room.

and the setback of the primary and according to the department's wireless guidelines and the installations of the preference six location which is limited preference location. and the guideline state of preference may be considered and approved by the commission for wireless carriers able to demonstrate the good faith efforts that a high preference site is available in the geographic service area site. and in this instance, at&t conducted the analysis and outlines the efforts at&t made in finding the more preferential site. and the analysis reveal nod public buildings or structures were revealed in the service area. and the structures and co-location sites are the two most preferential sites for wireless facilities according to the guidelines. the analysis also revealed that none of the sites are a subject

site and the department staff has reviewed the alternative site analysis and concurred that it is the most valuable site in the area and recommends the commission does the same. we note that the department has not received any public support or opposition regarding this proposition. and after analyzing all aspects, the department has found the project is desirable, compatible to the neighborhood, and recommends approval for the following to the facility to allow at&t to expand the wireless coverage and capacity in the project area. the project is consistent with the department's guidelines, and when viewed from the public rights of way, the antenna and ongoing intrusion to avoid disruption in the architectural integrity as well as the surrounding neighborhoods. this completes the staff presentation. i will be available for questions. thank you. president olague: thank you. project sponsor. >> good afternoon, president olague, members of the

commission. my name is haddy and i am joined today by gain ericsson from hammond medicine as well as our coordinator from k.d.i. consulting. i want to begin today by thanking aaron hollister and the planning staff for the hard work and support in helping us direct and design this location so that it is most compatible with the neighborhood and the community needs. this is an essential site for at&t coverage and capacity in the area. it's very busy thoroughfare and is an area for many businesses, residenc residences, and tour is and it has a lot of traffic on a day-to-day basis. many of you might know the site as the contador club sand right

at the corner of broadway and columbus. and very, very busy thoroughfare and people going into downtown all the way around. everybody is familiar with it. i see. okay. so our packet containing maps indicating these service improvement objectives and the site analysis and other pertinent information illustrates the significant service gap in the area and surrounding proposed locations. we did have nine alternative site analysis done in the area and was quite extensive and this is consistent with the planning department's determination and with that, i want to thank the planning department stf for their hard work in hemming us through this -- in helping us through this and the other site locations recognize pythagorean take a long time and we

appreciate that as well as your time and your support. olague thank you. we're happy to answer any questions. >> seeing no public comment, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini: move to approve. commissioner miguel: i will second, but i have a question. we have items on the consent calendar and it doesn't seem to have been well vetted internally no, opposition, and is there some reason that it was not on the consent calendar? >> in the recent past there has been a fair amount of

discussion. secretary avery: the motion is for approval. [vote taken] that passes unanimously. i will note there has been a quest for continue a witness -- for continuance on the item 16 and i believe there is somebody who wants to speak to that request. >> good afternoon. i am from t-mobile and we understand that there is concern among the community and we would like additional time to address the concerns and to be able to

deliver that information in a for efficient way to the community. thank you. president olague: thank you. is there any additional comment to the continuance? to the continuance? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner moore? commissioner moore: has the department received any phone calls either to continue this and is the applicant himself is suggesting, why would we not grant that? mr. sanchez? >> we have heard from the tenants of the inn and the property about concentration, health effects, and i believe the sponsor in response to some of the latter comments would like, to as she mentioned, take more time to work with the tenants and actually approached me and i understand she contacted each of the commissioners and the commission

secretary requesting a continuance until i believe january of 2012. commissioner moore: i am prepared to make a motion to continue if that is the consent on floor. >> second. commissioner moore: and i just wanted to mention that -- president olague: we continued it originally so that some more outreach could be done and able lot of that was completed already, but since the project sponsor is the one that is requesting the continuance, i am happy to continue it. but anyway? >> commissioner antonini. >> and do we need a date in january? secretary avery: commissioner, i will say we don't have our january calendars out. so -- president olague: the first available date in january, i suppose. secretary avery: that is whatst the president olague: and i believe

the e.p.h. did an initial reading already. and went out. that's fine. happy to go along with it if that is what you desire. secretary avery: commissioners, that would be january 12. president olague: commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: i should have revealed earlier i had a meeting with several representatives of the tenant organize organized and met with them and basically tried to explain things and what the emission issues were and what commissioner miguel and others said today and if they did have concerns, they should try to work with the project sponsor and if they were to come to the commission, hopefully they would be organized and have specific points to talk to and that kind of thing. i did receive feed bab and -- i

did receive feedback. i didn't take any sides one way or the other. most everyone was appreciative. just to let people know that. president olague: we were concerns about roof leakages and things like that and i believe they checked first on that and didn't find any. mr. nelson, you are here probably for this item, but it's going to be continued, though, until january. you can address that when the item comes back and hopefully you will attend some of the meetings. keep in touch. great. thank you. secretary avery: who seconded the motion? president olague: commissioner sugaya. secretary avery: on the motion for continuance of the item to january 12, 2012, commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> commissioner fong. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner miguel. >> aye. >> commissioner olague.

>> thank you. that item has been continued to january 12, 2012. and commissioner, you are now on item number 17. case number 2011.0664c for 39.01 mission street. >> good afternoon, commissioners. diego sanchez with the planning department staff. before you i present a request for conditional use authorization under planning code section 711.8 # for the wireless transmission network with the nc2 and small-scale neighborhood commercial zoning district at 3901 mission street at college avenue and current use of the one-story building is a landromat. staff has received multiple letters and calls regarding this problem with health concerns and property value loss and a lack of necessity of an additional wireless facility given the existing service in coverage.

those who support the site to mod earpize the existing wireless structure and without giving objections by those stated in opposition. i have a set of letters for you that i received and i can present these to you. we received two letters of support and the balance, which i believe is about six to eight, are in opposition. those were sent to me either via email or i made photocopies of the originals. commissioners, the pr posed project complies with the planning code and is consistent with the 1996 w.t.s. facilities siting guidelineses. the proposed location is classified as a prefed site for wireless -- as a preferred site for wireless tranmission fail fails and being a wholly commercial structure. they have complied with all the requirements including holding a community outreach meeting to residents within 500 feet of the

proposed location in august of 2011. the proposed project will complete the wireless telecommunication network and provide the service in demand and serves the public good. they recommend the findings of approve and i am available for questions. thank you. commissioner miguel: thank you. project sponsor. >> this is it, i promise. good afternoon, commissioners. here today on 3901 mission street. still joined by our radio frequency engineers from hammond medicine and our project coordinator from k.d.i. consulting. thank you, diego, for your help and your support and your direction on this site.

and the coverage of the capacity and at college and mission street and which is a location which is near glen park. and that is an area that we are looking to improve the kovj in the site. our packets do contain and the alternative analysis and review those questions. and otherwise i will keep it brief and thank you. commissioner miguel: thank you. i have a number of speaker cards. the time will be limited to two minutes as on the previous items. [calling of names]

every person gets two minutes, regardless, so if you don't wish to speak -- i'm sorry, the way is code is written, each person receives their own time. that's been interpreted by the city attorney. >> the four minutes is for translation. but they merely didn't speak. no one got extra time. everyone is timed the same way. speak whenever you wish. >> first i would like to clarify i didn't organize anybody. basically we are all a grass root movement in our own neighborhood and decided to come together. my name is howell and i tam vice president of the college neighborhood association. and i am also a broker and i am

a small timer and in the area that are too small for big antenna capacity. and what is the conditions used for this? the public hearing process and public use permit and allows the conditional use within the property not allowed. how far, the use is not essential or desirable to the community being affected. is it necessary in the neighborhood? without our -- with our at&t service iphones and notepads we have and i am happy to tell you that we have great reaccepting. and why here is our neighborhood which is low income housing and appear to be wealthier areas at foley park and they don't have very good reaccepting. they are outside the 300-foot radius and glen park that make greater use of wireless technology and understand the real estate values.

the mere perception of the health risk and lower property advisors are those living near a cell tower and for the crisis and it has noted that property prices can decrease by as much as 20% depending on the proximity of the residential tower antenna. i am currently developing the housing neighborhood in the victorian for years and years and spending close to $450,000 to remodel. i want to let you know that these really have a huge impact on property prices. for those up familiar with this area, it is the glenn park border centered on a forgotten and blighted section of the mission with empty shops. however, over the past few years the neighborhood is starting to see the first rebirth of regeneration and started with a few brave families moving into

and renovating the old victori n victoria victorians, such as another member who is here and will speak on her own half. the process of change. and to establish us with the mission street. and another resident is also here to talk about her property. in the other merchants which told me to speak on their behalf. we are now seeing the formation of a real community undertaking the cleanup of the nearby sites and we can't even walk to the glen park station or through the community because the rate of human waste. and we are taking the cleanup of the community of san jose avenue and preparing for street planting and neighborhood watch. we have a neighborhood watch because we get a lot of crime down there. and for measure of our own very neighborhood association. it is truly a grass root

regeneration. excuse me. city budget, but it's a very fragile regeneration. and with the position of the antenna in the neighborhood. [bell ringing] >> we will never agree on the health care -- we will never hear of the health threat to the neighborhood, but we can be sure of the very real economic threat to them. if you want to ep courage families to stay and move to our neighborhood a more broadly san francisco as you often claim, please do not allow the installation of the antennas. thank you for your time. >> thanks for the opportunity to address you. i am melissa hurley and i have lived in san francisco for 20 years and been a homeowner for five years living within 300 feet of the proposed wireless

facility. at 3901 mission street. i am also a parent of two young children age 2 and 4. my husband and i love san francisco and our neighborhood. we recently invested a significant amount of money to expand our home to accommodate our family to stay here long term. we have trained as a scientist with a master's degree in cell molecular biology and work for a my major biotechnology company helping to bring new drugs to the market. i am no stranger to clinical trials and the analysis of clinical status. i believe there is insufficient data to conclude the continuous long-term exposure of radio frequency radiation especially for children. and i am alarmed by the prospect of having a wireless facility install sod close to my property. i understand i can't argue against the facility on the grounds of any health concern, but i can assure you that i will not expose my children to even a potential health risk that could

impact their development. if this project goes ahead, we will have to make the tough decision to decide whether or not to sell our home and leave the area as olga has eloquently explained, the installation of the wireless facility is neither desirable or necessary to our neighborhood. i ask that you reject the proposal. thank you. >> thank you. [calling of names] >> i am rebecca terioni and we live 500 feet from the proposed site. we have been proud members of the community the past two years which is a place we have grown to love and hope to raise our children. however f the po posed antenna plan was to go ahead, i can assure you we would seriously reconsider and rethink our plan and potentially leave the

neighborhood for good. we are iphone own ores and are not against technology or innovation and in the past year owning our phones we have never noticed a decrease or failure in the cell reception in and around the service area of the proposed ap ten that site. as i understand the conditional use request, the permit can only be issued if the cell antenna is shown to be both necessary and desirable and as an at&t customer i can assure you it is unnecessary because i have perfect reception. that fact it must be desirable brings up another point. we love where we live and even though he spends three hours a day commuting to redwood city and back, we choose to live in san francisco. we choose to live in our neighborhood. and we choose to keep the family, to keep our family in the city we have grown to love. eventually we would want to buy and invest in a home. a and, excuse me, i am aware the f.c.c. telecommunications act of 1996 prevents you from ruling on

the site based on health concerns alone, so i want to clarify the next statement so you don't misunderstand me, but if the antenna is installed, my concern is with the health concerns. if i tried to sell my house, i would be losing potential value in my home and that is what i am concerned with and i ask you to consider if you want to see san francisco lose another tax paying family. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is maddy and i am the owner of giovanni's pizza. and i start the business in 2008 and it has been a very tough few years for a new business. however, i have seen a lot of new families move into the neighborhood in the past couple of years and they are the foundation of my business. the proposed antenna is less

than 50 feet from my business and i am very concerned that it will prevent young families with children from moving into the area and undermine my business. thank you. president olague: sn is there sni additional public comment -- is there any additional public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner miguel. commissioner miguel: much in the same manner as on the item regarding the installation of chinese hospital and the public realized how important the commission felt that informed public information is necessary, there is a question that was just raised on this one and i think we have heard hints of it before. and through the at&t

representative, am i -- my suggestion is that you get together with all of the other antenna representatives and perhaps jointly bring forth some actual statistics on land value and residential values. and i haven't heard that presented here. if this is going to be another question that's going to come p up, i like to look at facts and not done by your staff and with the independent, recognized organization that would be informative to me and the rest of the commission if we keep hearing this because it is very difficult for me anyway too