-- and the electronic devices that may sound off during these proceedings. i am also going to, because the room is crowded, going to remind everyone that if you feel the need to engage in the secondary discussion, that you take those discussions outside, because they become disruptive to this process. we do ask that you respect to

this. we ask that you not applaud any speaker, that you're not hiss or boo any speaker. everyone has the right to address this commission on the way they feel the need to address them, without hindrance from any member of the audience. with that, roll-call. commissioner antonini? commissioner borden? commissioner fong? commissioner miguel? commissioner moore? president olague? commissioner sugaya? thank you. we have a full commission. commissioners, the first category, adams proposed for a continuance. item one this case 2011.0034d, for andover street, a continuance to january 26, 2012. item two is 2011.1064c for sloat boulevard. continued to item 3 is case

number 2007.0310c, 1340 natoma street proposed for indefinite continuous. commissioners, with that, i am not aware of any other item on your calendar being proposed for a continuance. president olague: is there any public comment on the items proposed for continuance? seeing them, public comment is closed. commissioner miguel: i move the items on the continuous counter to the date stated. >> second. >> thank you. the motion on the floor is for a continuance of items one, two, and three as they have been proposed but on that motion, commissioner antonini? commissioner borden? commissioner fong? commissioner miguel? commissioner moore? president olague? commissioner sugaya? thank you. those items have been continued as proposed the commissioners, you are now your consent calendar. item number four constitutes the

consent calendar this week, considered to be routine. it would be acted upon by a single roll call vote of this commission be gathered in a separate discussion of this item unless member of the commission, public, our staff makes a request, and then it would be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. case number 2011.0726c, 41188 franklin street. a request for a conditional use authorization to allow at&t mobility to locate up to nine wts panel antennas flush mounted to the building's exterior and related economic on the roof of a four-story office building occupied by the international longshore and warehouse union. it is in an nc-3 district and 130-e height and bulk

distributor this side in location preference 3, a wholly commercial structure. falling public comment, which would automatically remove this from the consent calendar, this is in your hand. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner miguel: i move the item on the consent calendar, item four. >> second. >> the motion on the floor is for approval of 1188 franklin street as proposed. on that motion -- commissioner antonini? commissioner borden? commissioner fong? commissioner miguel? commissioner moore? president olague? commissioner sugaya? thank you, the item has been approved as proposed. we're now at commissioner's questions and matters. item number 5 is for your consideration, a draft of the hearing scheduled for 2012.

i send the schedule to each of you electronically. >> i do not have it. >> so you did not bring it with you? >> no. >> madam president, you did receive this last friday electronically peter thank you. i just wanted to acknowledge that. president olague: we did receive it. >> because you do not have it, the city attorney will make copies and bring it up. i ask that we delay this item until after item 6 or even after directors report, to allow you a chance to get caught up. president olague: ok. >> thank you. item number six. are there any other commission matters? commissioner antonini: thank you. i want to think the housing action coalition for forwarding a reprint from the "new york times" of a very interesting but for the review of a book, the history of suburban corporate lans good speed of the oft -- the author is from san francisco, luis mosingo,

professor of landscape architecture and environmental planning at you see berkeley. what is really interesting is the history of how we got into the situation we're in in the first place, with the first, i guess, business part of being 1942 when at&t and bell telephone moved some of its offices from lower manhattan to somewhere near new jersey, and that was the beginning of a trend that happened over the next 70 years or so, which is unfortunate, because in addition to the environmental waste in the using of private agricultural land, it also does some other really negative things. is segregates these people from the rest of the community, because they basically, if they do not get there by automobile, they cannot get there, and they do not leave the place their working hours, because the cafeteria is there and there's no place to go. sidewalks and auditing connect these to any other place where

you can go. so you use the civic connection you have in cities with shopping, housing, recreation, and transportation. it points specifically to various places, certainly with reference to silicon valley. some of the silicon valley business parts, but also bishop bart and the is day is a classic example. but that did very poor land use, because they spread out what could be condensed into one city block over acres and acres over what used to be prime farmland. the other suggests a number of different things we can do and is certainly help to stop federal and state governments from paying for new highway extension to make these kind of business parks and other development of agricultural land possible. and also, at least required ones that exist, to make connections between these parks to the nearest housing and near a town so people can take transit there, what they're, bicycle

there, not necessarily have to go by automobile, and perhaps even patronize those areas of little bit more. third, which i think is a key point, provide favorable tax treatment for businesses that locate within established urban areas and perhaps even have an extra tax for companies that should choose to promote further sprawl into suburban areas. and this is also true, to a large degree, for sports and entertainment complexes, and we have all seen the great success with at&t park and how people get in and out of there pretty easily double that very easily, and it is a fabric of san francisco and the entire bay area. although candlestick is much maligned, last sunday in many times, i have walked from the t- line to candlestick, and easy half mile walk, as is the case with caltrain.

many people take buses. i notice probably 20% or more actually use public transportation to get in and out of games, which would not be the case to be built some complex in the middle of nowhere without any public transportation. anyway, that being said, i think that is a really good article and hopefully we can begin to influence sensible public policy in regards to relocating business into urban areas and helping the environment and also, you know, helping to end terming the -- people to intermingle with each other and not be so isolated. commissioner miguel: yes, just to tier of of commissioner antonini's comment on the other thing that business parks do is they have all of these fleets that are exclusive to particular businesses. there's no cooperation among

them. they all offer roughly the same route. and it just clogs things even murder -- even further. aside from that, in the past week, i had discussions with people regarding geary brt, if that ever comes to pass. the item on our calendar today, the at&t towers on 14th avenue, some of the aspects of america's cup and the project that is proposed for the old site at california and hyde. president olague: i just wanted to ask that we close the meeting, and in honor of michael goldstein, he was an activist in the lgbt community, and he watched our broadcast here all the time and spend a lot of time educating me, at least, on issues that pertain to the need for affordable housing for

different low-income communities and medical cannibus issues as well -- medical cannibis issues as well. it was a huge loss. he passed away last friday. i would like to close in his memory. commissioner moore: i assume that everybody has read in the paper that the w hotel filed an appeal on the museum. and on another point, the aia is created website to connect tall projects with architects and investors bid aren't up that was a very interesting thing, actually a nationwide thing, and i thought that was projected to give people an ability to really look at what is on the board and what might be part of financing. i think it creates a message in

regards to them being active on that. >> thank you. madam president, do you want to go back? president olague: yes, lets discuss the calendar. >> item number 5, consideration of the dalton -- adoption of the proposed calendar hearing schedule of the planning commission for 2012. the draft shows my verbose calendar for you. i have a couple of questions that i am not sure of for august 30 and november 29, but with that, the matter is before you for your consideration. president olague: i would just may be said that i would flip -- we can discuss this, obviously. but i would actually keep the august 16 meeting and cancel the august 30, because it is the fifth thursday. that is expected. clearly, we can discuss it.

there are going to be people who are going to go on vacation, and the board obviously takes a break. but it was really hard on the calendar this year. there were a lot of items that had to be moved off because of that three-week break in august. if we could avoid that this year, we should limit it to two weeks. also, russian shanna was something that we shall make sure that -- what day is that? >> i think we are ok on that. commissioner antonini: i would agree. i think that there are times when we're busier than others, but generally speaking, it is hard to keep continuity, and there are instances where meetings become very long if we had to recessions. i would also think that we would want to add the thursday, the 29th, which is the fifth thursday, but we are off the

week before because of thanksgiving. because of the change on the calendar, it limits us to only two sessions in december. so we would be off a lot at the end of the year. historically, we have always had a lot of items at the end of the year for a variety of reasons. so i just think, you put them on their, you can always take them off, but you cannot add them back. in the fifth thursdays, the 29 indeed 31, we would take that up as needed. if we are very busy, we could always at the sessions. but that would be my recommendation. >> i think you combine two things there for me. you are actually asking that would put back in the -- november 29. commissioner antonini: right, and i agree with president olague is that we at the 16th and have our high is the last two weeks of august. >> ok, thank you.

commissioner moore: since this year, the august days fall differently from last year, i would suggest that we do not use august 16 as a day off but leave it, because we are really eroding the calendar in the manner that we are having significantly fewer meetings than what we need to do our work properly. that includes the comment on never 29, i do believe that -- on november 29, i believe that since december is so short, we need to add november 29. president olague: i can respect the people go on vacation and will not be here in august. and that is fine. there will be fewer commissioners. but i can tell you, we struggled along with the calendar last year. in a three-week lot in august really caused a lot of challenges.

we had to continue so many items because of that three-week block. i hope we consider including august 16. that gives two weeks. if anybody wants three weeks off, there's nothing that prevents them from doing so. commissioner miguel: i would agree with including meetings on august 16 and november 29. to my knowledge, and linda can correct me, the commissioners have been very, very good in and notifying her of their particular personal schedules, so we were always assured a quorum without a problem, and we do not have a quorum problem in a long, long time. in my memory, actually. so i think we're quite all right in doing it this way. commissioner antonini: do we need to move a motion to adopt the calendar? i would move to adopt the

calendar, as proposed, with the changes that adding that there is a, august 16 and thursday, november 29. >> second. president olague: thank you. >> commissioners, with that motion of adopting the draft calendar with the modification that we add back in as a hearing date, thursday, august 16, and thursday, november 29. on that motion -- commissioner antonini? commissioner borden? commissioner fong? commissioner miguel? commissioner moore? president olague? commissioner sugaya? thank you, commissioners. calendar for 2012 has been adopted. commissioners, we're now at directors reports. directors announcements and a review the past week's events at the board of appeals, board of supervisors, in the historic preservation commission. >> thank you.

three announcements from me today. one is that at long last, our communications manager will be on board in about three weeks, by the middle of january. we had cleared the necessary arrangements to hire her, and we're pleased will be joining us at long last. second, in your packet that you will receive this afternoon is a memo on the budget. we're at that moment already where we're starting the budget process. seems like we just ended, and we are starting again. in fact, we just ended. the memo is kind of looking at year to date, this fiscal year. it covers the data we have, which is the first four months of this year, and looked ahead to how we are doing for the current fiscal year. you will be having a series of hearings early in the year, including your first meeting of -- on january 12, when we will be starting the budget discussions for next fiscal year. there, and a reminder that, like last year, the department's

primary offices will be closed during the holiday week, december 26, the permit counter will be open, as well dbi's, but the actual department offices will be closed for that week. that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> good afternoon. i am from the planning department staff, here to give you your weekly update on the board of supervisors activities as they pertain to planning and land use. the land use committee heard a hearing on the status of formula retell this week. it was a request from supervisor mar on iger the formula retail stores in the city, and he wanted to hear the impacts on our small businesses, neighborhood, workers, and the economy. the supervisor provides it -- wanted an updated report share earlier this summer. this report contains information on the definition of formula retail, the history on the

legislation and how it has been changed since 2004, and the information on the number, type, and results of formula of retail permits since that time. staff in the small business commission spoke on the economic impact of the chain stores versus local stores, as did a number of committee advocates, including representatives from locally-owned hardware stores, pet stores, and a group called san francisco locally-owned merchants alliance, sloma. there were speakers from outside sentences go, employees from walmart in a group called save our walmart, seeking living wages for these the police. some members of the public questioned both the appropriate ness and the message white -- by which they live in the consideration of formula regional concentration in neighborhood commercial district. the committee members were

really interested in the maps that were provided, showing where formula retail and then approved. supervisor cohen expressed sentiments in support of economic equity, and she seemed to be seeking certain formula retail opportunities within her district. . mar said they should be sensitive to local stores and businesses and that the issue is ripe for read visitation. supervisor mar will be asking for a steady and economic impacts of this in the future but the hearing was concluded without action and continued to the call of the chair. there were a couple of appeals on the tuesday board of supervisors meeting i want to share. the first was an appeal of the conditional use authorization for a wireless antenna on a church on larson street.

it was approved on september 22 of this year. the question was on the necessity and desirability of the installation. they claim the preference at one location site was not the best location for these antennas. and a better location would have been summer in the polk neighborhood commercial districts. after hearing materials presented to the commission, stabbed explain that public sites such as this church have been the city's first preference for antennas since 1980 -- 1996 but the hearing, appellants claimed that open dbi enforcement complaints should have presented the issuance of the cu, and staff checked with the deputy director of enforcement and inspections at dbi, and we're were assured that there were no active violations or issues warranted. the appellants then compared at&t's coverage maps presented

to this commission, which showed some coverage gaps in coverage gaps shown by at&t's marketing arm, which showed good coverage. after public comment from the district supervisor and board president, he asked planning staff about the conflicting information. staff described that these maps were not specifically presented before the planning commission for your consideration. but that this commission has found at&t's coverage maps to be compelling. the board than rigorously questioned at&t about their coverage maps. supervisor wiener wanted to reject the cu but to approve a new one with the condition that planning staff take an intent -- big an independent state licensed engineer to evaluate the coverage in the area. planning step is to consult with both the appellant and the project sponsor on the selection. and a potential consult would have to sign a confidentiality

agreement that was acceptable to at&t. if it is evaluated at the gap would be improved by new antennas, the cu will be approved also. if there is no gap or the gap is not approved by the installation, the antennas will be disapproved. at&t will fund the costs charged by this independent evaluator to with that the many conditions, the board voted 8-3 to approve the cu. the other appeal with the appeal of a subdivision at 1138 k street that planning issues revolving around a number of units of the property and whether review had been completed. in this case, there were two units, but only one permitted residential unit and one permit commercial unit. the appellant claim that the rigid of residential units, the party should have gone through the condo conversion lottery prior to the subdivision map approval. staff informed the board that

since the property was a single- family dwelling unit with one commercial unit and not two residential units, the subdivision was permitted a step presented evidence that ceqa had been performed twice on this permit. once for the building permit and a dr that was to be before yuba was with -- but was withdrawn. and the same for the subdivision. the bar -- the board voted 11-0 to uphold the subdivision. there was one piece of new legislation on wanted to share with you. supervisor elsbernd introduce an amendment to the planning code that would allow automobile sales for rental in a neighborhood commercial s districts as a conditional use. that concludes my report. i did hear from the zoning administrator that there were no items at the board of appeals or no action on items at the board of appeals, i guess i should say. commissioner borden: two questions. first about the at&t conditional

use. i am a little confused. it is going to go forward, that there will be this evaluation on top of that? >> yes, sometimes this commission will approve the project, but you will not be quite satisfied with the design, so you'll ask planning staff to continue to work on the design with the project sponsors. in this case, the board did approve the cu, the it is contingent upon this additional work. >> what, if anything, and i know that the supervisor is here, but this is an ongoing issue that we have, and i think that -- great for this neighborhood, i suppose, but it is not a real answer or a problem to the larger issue, and we have antenna on the calendar today. i guess, i want to know if any conversation happened about the broader issue and how the board might want to deal with it? >> at this hearing, there's no discussion -- i believe there was no -- the super buzzer can correct me if i am wrong.

in previous hearings, there have been in discussions, suggestions by least three supervisors that the current review process is inadequate and should be revisited. >> i might also add, at the risk of linda's asking me to cool it, we have been talking to the department of public health and the department of information technology about their involvement on these issues. the two issues that seem to be of most interest are health issues and coverage issues. >> excuse me, for those of you at the table over there, your conversation is being -- is interrupting the process. can you take your conversation outside? can you take it outside and help him? thank you. >> the two issues that come up a lot our coverage issues and health issues, neither of which

the department of planning is equipped to deal with. we are organizing discussions with those two departments to ask if -- ask their assistance on the matter, and whether it is only the visual issues, only the issues that we can deal with that our department level. we're discussing alternative methods of approving the towers as well. commissioner borden: the other question was about neighborhoods. what does that apply to? >> that district is actually one of the few that is oriented towards automobiles. it is shopping districts. there is it a little shopping mall like portola. i know that is the ncs area, and we will bring a map when we hear that item. commissioner antonini: on the discussion of formula retail,

did supervisors have reports from staffer from outside consultants on the issue? >> we provided the same report to the board that was provided to this commission. other folks discussed economic impacts, but i do not believe anyone provided an economic report at this hearing. supervisor mar will be asking for such a report to be completed in the near term. commissioner antonini: i should remember this from the presentation, but was there any mention of the dollars that go outside of san francisco to formula retail that does not exist in san francisco, and this is often a factor that is not discussed but sometimes, for one reason or another, people want to go to various formula retail either for products or price points, and if they have to drive out of san francisco, they will do it to get that establishment.