we're not limiting to beer and wine? just bear? ok. -- just beer? ok. also, the bowling alley of course, we lost rock 'n' bowl, we definitely need this type of use in the mission. some of the calls i have been receiving from members of the community is that a lot of consideration be given to families and youth. supervisor kim, i am sure you have that on your radar. the project sponsor has done it some outreach to groups and sometimes what i observe is there is a pick and choose on who the, reaches down to. a-- the outreach is done to.

that would -- there might be challenges you end up at a better place. i think that is really it. but i think, it creates a certain balance. everything has been so moving so fast. i do not think anyone has had a chance to, what is the word, consider a lot of different things. thank you. -- thank you for your work on this. commissioner moore: i want to talk to the owner of the roxy theater and make a point regarding i fully understand that it is supporting or in proving your business that you want alcohol and i am supportive of it to the extent the price

point of which are selling stays within the general range of the audience you are currently serving. i had an experience which almost had me -- i bought a bottle of water. and it was for $4.50 and it was so shocked -- i was so shocked, it if you are selling water and beer, that does not go into $10 are $12 because it would be losing and not helping the audience you are trying to attract. i am moving on thin water. i hope all those things stay in line with the intent of the amendment the code is being considered. >> absolutely. we are conscious of our prices and our concession prices with relation to to our patrons are.

we have the cheapest concessions of any movie theater in san francisco and we want to continue that. vice president miguel: thanks. -- commissioner moore: thanks. supervisor kim: ensuring community out with -- outrage is something we considered. we met with the owners and ask them to outreach to the mission neighborhood. it is a concern because there is a conflict within the neighborhood of never heard serving retail versus -- neighborhoods serving retail. we were happy to receive the feedback of a developing partnership. with the rocks when they came to us after the legislation had been introduced we ask them to do the same outrage that many had made to the committee. roxie already does a lot of

community partnerships -- roxy does a lot of community partnerships. they showed a documentary about a vietnamese development center. i want to thank our director and are planning commission staff and ms. hayward for working on this with us. thank you. commissioner sugaya: are we limiting this to nonprofit theaters? are we recommending that or no? i think it should be single screen theaters. president olague: i would support single screen theaters. >> your amendment is to extend the exception to single screen movie theaters? commissioner sugaya: correct. >> we do not currently have a definition of a single screen theaters. you could argue it is in the

title but i wanted to make sure you are aware of that. president olague: this is a recommendation or. -- recommendation. commissioner moore: it is so locations that -- specific, it would meet the definition of a single screen theater. >> i want to make sure i'm clear. this became -- we are not talking about the roxy bitter but any theater within the mission -- theater but not -- and a theater within the mission sdd. >> there is a motion on the floor to recommend this to the board with the amendment they include simple screen theaters

in the mission district. on that motion, commissioner antonini, aye. commissioner borden, aye. commissioner fong, aye. commissioner moore, aye. commissioner sugaya, aye. commissioners, you are on item 13. reconstruction of buildings damaged or destroyed by fire or acts of god. >> good iafternoon. this is sponsored by supervisor cohen. i would like to convey her regrets that she could not be here. both t her staff are automating, i guess it was a shooting in the district and a young-5 year-old child was shot -- a young 5-year-old child

was shot. they did prepare a letter for you. i would like to get that letter to the commission secretary. i only have one copy. we received a letter from the previous zoning administrator from the planning commission. you might have gotten this by e- mail already. the ordinance would amend to provide process for the reconstruction of nonconforming uses our buildings damaged or describe it -- destroyed by fire or acts of god, a public enemy as well but not the rap star public enemy. public enemy as defined by the law. it would provide a retroactive date of august 1, 2009. the way it is now, the code has a way for these nonconforming uses that were destroyed in that way to be rebuilt but the current process is specific.

it is specific but not very specific. it has led to different interpretations of the years. the current language says that provided this use a building could be rebuilt provided the restoration is permitted by the building code and it started within one year. and started within one year has been subject to enter -- interpretation over the years. there were three circumstances propose before you that would clearly define or try to define what started within one year means. i could describe those to you in more detail. our department has proposed that simpler changes serve the same purpose in what we believe to be a more elegant manner. the department's recommendation is to change the existing started within one year into a language that is not subject to debate but also is fair and we have worked with the supervisor

and interested parties and we have struck this balance with more clarity and fairness for people who may be stuck in the situation right now. what is before you will change the current one-year to a slightly longer time to 18 months and would clarify that for "started within 18 months" means 18 months after the calamity has occurred, the owner shall have fired date -- filed a building permit application. four recent projects, this may have been caught in need of more flexibility. the resolution added and on codified section that would provide 18 months for anyone is in a situation to file a current building permit. that is the proposal before you as well as our recommendation. i can answer any questions if you have any. or we can go to public comment. president olague: will go to

public comment at this time. -- we will go to public comment at this time. >> good afternoon. i am jim rubin, the interested party who has a warehouse in the bayview hunters point that burned down in august 2009. that was part of six warehouses that burned down that resulted from an illegal pot growing operation somewhere in the neighborhood and they all burned. for the last 32 years, we submitted to declarations -- two declarations. the building process has been interpreted to mean something diligent. that language is ambiguous and it has been interpreted differently from current -- by a current zoning administrator. what we're asking for and what they supervisor has suggested is a way to essentially redraft the

rest -- legislation to harmonize the intent of the legislation, if you have something that was destroyed by a comedy and is nonconforming you are entitled to rebuild it if that is your intent in new diligently repute -- perfect -- pursuit rebuilding. it takes a long time to negotiate with insurance companies and a long time to get through, i am sorry, your process, and it takes a long time to get through plan check. last comment. we're fine with the changes the department recommends rather than those that were drafted by the city attorney and sent to them. they will work for us. thank you. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> you basically have three items the department has come up with that are great improvement over the original attempt at language.

semantics are always difficult. one is 18 months, the second is a building permit and you are at pipeline proje problem with the them. 18 months as was just mentioned reflects the current situation. -- i have no problem with them. the building permit is an absolute known fact and i do not feel we should penalize the one or very few projects that mad -- maybe in the pipeline. i would move to approve those changes to the code. commissioner antonini: commissioner miguel, that would be staff recommendation. vice president miguel: staff recommendation. commissioner antonini: i had a couple of questions on this. it would be as was pointed out,

it would be the election of the property owner to retrofit or not. he could demolish and build a new structure if he so chose. >> that is correct. we're talking about nonconforming uses. a use that is no longer permitted and find an avenue to allow them to rebuild if it was unintentionally destroyed but they're not required to rebuild. commissioner antonini: you can elect to have paid a higher premium to afford to do the code changes to bring our new structure up to code, this has to be looked at someone judiciously. i am going to vote for this but there are some things that are in code for reason that were not there long ago when these buildings were built. health and safety would not be applied in this situation. >> the ordinance applies to --

[unintelligible] commissioner antonini: for residential, things would apply as though it was a new building. >> this is for any nonconforming use, residential or other. commissioner antonini: thank you. >> on that motion, commissioner antonini, aye. commissioner borden, aye. commissioner fong, aye. commissioner moore, aye. commissioner sugaya, aye. president olague, aye. >> good evening. before you today is a request to install macro wireless 8 --

inside a structure that is currently used at the church. this would be included inside an existing steeple and equipment cabinets located in an internal room. this is considered a preference one location, the most preferred for this installation. the department has received correspondence in support and opposition to the project. the department received a petition containing approximately 24 signatures. the department has received opposition from local neighborhood group, the russian hill neighborhood association and the petition contains 350 signatures. the concerns include radiofrequency exposure and structural stability to the steeple. as you are aware, the project

must be complied with fcc radiofrequency exposure requirements by the department of public health. additionally, please be aware that all structural review of the project occurs during the building permit stage which occurs after a conditional use authorization, department of building inspection will be in charge of all review of structural considerations. all aspects of the project, the department has found a project to be desirable and compatible to the neighborhood and recommends approval. it would appall -- allowed to expand wireless coverage in the area, the project is consistent with guidelines, it is a preferred site for wireless facilities. they [unintelligible] would avoid disruption of integrity to the building as well as the surrounding neighborhood.

this concludes my presentation. i will be available for questions. president olague: thank you. project sponsor? >> good afternoon, commissioners, president olague. i am here seeking your approval for a six panel antennas located at 2041 larkin street, also known as church of the fellowship for all. i am joined by shane erickson and representatives from the church. this is a preference one location under the 1996 wallet -- wireless telecommunications guidelines which you know is the most favorable of locations. we originally sent out the committee meeting notification

months ago, we received three calls into our hot line seeking additional information. our plan are made it to where some of the -- made us aware of the concerns. we stopped the work and canceled the meeting and sent out the team to reevaluate the site. the team consisted of the site acquisition manager, the radiofrequency engineer, a licensed professional structural engineer, as well as a representative from medicine. the team came back with 27 sites, all this favor. all these sites were submitted to the clerk of the commission. -- the team came back with 27 sites, all disfavored. we are addressing the significant gaps in coverage as a line. we sent out the new notices, i presented and attended the

meeting. there were two main reasons. one, emf and the structurally -- structural integrity of the steeple. you're going to hear discussion around the structural integrity where we plan to place 650-pound antennas. the equipment will be placed on the second floor. -- we are planning to place six 50 lb antennas. when we file for a building permit is face to. as part of the construction phase, we provide extensive information including a structural engineering report from a licensed professional engineer. if at that time changes are required by the department of building inspection, we will of course comply. as you know, at&t is legitimately working to upgrade its network to meet these

telecommunications demands within san francisco. it is doing so in a manner that takes prudent and careful consideration of the aesthetic impact of the facility and the values the city seeks to promote. this application was consistent with city land use regulations and the wtf guidelines. this would be the least intrusive means by which at&t could fill the gap in the area. i ask the planning commission to approve a conditional use permit before you today. we are available to answer any questions you might have. president olague: will be limiting public comment to 2 minutes. based on the number of speaking -- speaker cards. -- we will be limiting public comment to 2 minutes. brian caston, rev. dorsey o'blake. >> that afternoon, commissioners.

my name is albert yates. i would like to read from a platform statement that i am currently petitioning now. i would like to take this opportunity to introduce myself. i am albert yates and i am running for vice president of the southeast campus student association. i am currently a noncredit student. i have been involved as a -- in the student council for several semesters in both capacities as vice-president and president, currently president of the spring semester 2011. i am trying to bring back to the southeast campus computer technology classes. our original classes, engineering technology and electronics, very important, or

any computer classes from the city college curriculum, as ta i come with you to -- with the opportunity to have a learning program. this is a student involving a program that helps city college students and the community. my goal and commitment to help the community find -- be able to use the digital divide. i am board of trustees for the fellowship of all people. we need the technology. that technology has allowed us to do stuff like this. that is all i have to say.

>> good afternoon. i am brian caston, currently the board chair for the church. i have been in the position as of april of this year. for the last seven years i have been the treasurer. i may certified public accountant. i am here in support of the issue before you this afternoon. we have -- the church has been -- founded in 1944. it is the church for the fellowship of all people, the first interracial, interdenominational church founded in this country. it was intentionally designed by reverend alfred fisk who was a caucasian professor at the time. the church founded in 1944 with

the intention of bringing races together. most of the conversation that came to the church were middle- aged individuals. at this point, they are senior individuals. the church has lost a lot of its membership through death, primarily. there are -- we have a small conversation, generally 50 to 70 people who are on the roles of the church. [bell] we have seen this incident as an issue, an opportunity to help us have revenue and also to make changes to any of these structural repairs that are needed at the church. i thank you for your time and i ask you to vote in favor of this issue. thank you. president olague: julie wong and

jasmine limb, caroline kella, hannah jewitt. >> i am the provided -- presiding minister. i wanted to say that i have been very impressed by the diligence of at&t. there are a lot of concerns the members had when this was brought to us and their diligence has a limit -- deleted the questions we have had. -- alleviated questions we have had. we're on the search for coming -- common ground. we have sponsored many programs to ensure this. we get awards every year -- give awards every year to people struggling to bring people together. we have many concerns when we started this and we have very much pleased with the diligence of at&t to respond to our

questions. my main reason for being here was to answer questions you might have rather than to make a presentation. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> i am jason polido and we have worked to do a counter- presentation. president olague: we never received a request. there has to be a request. i did not receive anything in writing. >> ok. >> do we come up one by one at this point? >> i did not get a card. >> i live at 2037 larkin street, i am the director next-door neighbor to 2041 larkin street. first we're here not to speak about wireless or the possible dangers of cell phones, but we would like to point out four facts that we think will help determine that this does not

meet the guidelines for a conditional use permit. san francisco lacks a general plan for wireless systems throughout the city. my associates will speak to the safety of the structure and the integrity of 2041 larkin street. 70.3% of residents within a 300- foot residents are in opposition. the multiple proposed site in commercial areas indicates this is not necessary. it was back on february 17 at the planning commission that you expressed -- not all of you but some of you expressed frustration and requested the planning director determine steps necessary to develop a plan. commissioner miguel spoke, we're being piecemealed to death. commissioner moore was looking

for plan based on my request and david geffen -- different guidance. a commissioner remarked he noted the frustration of his colleagues. we're doing the same thing here for the next six years. that was back on february 17. i am asking what the planning department has done to find an overall guidance play in -- plant for telecommunications services. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> i live at 1425 alito -- vallejo street. the -- one of the big concerns we have as was mentioned is the

structural integrity. we understand that they church of fellowship of all peoples is a very historic institution in san francisco. that speaks to the diversity of san francisco. as far as the maintenance of the building, there has been no seismic retrofitting in this building which was built in 1907. there is no record of it. there has been no or early maintenance work. there have been three permits, one in 2003, 2005, and 2010. none of them has been -- has the final signature from the inspectors from the -- from the inspectors, from the city inspector. there also has been violations of the san