commissioners. i am a register engineered in the state of california and this is our report dated 2012 reporting on the work that we did under the direction for the coverage provided by at&t and we do a couple of things and for your interest we go and take measurements in all of the areas. we do a drive test using calibrated equipment and the signal there during the high peak times and we compare the results where what they put on the map and if there is agreement which there was in this case and we will put a statement that we concur with the maps so that is based on independent test that we do with our own time and equipment. >> thank you. i appreciate it. well, i tend to think it's

counter intuitive that at&t wants do more because there is expense there and the point that they do feed off of each other as was pointed out i think that makes a lot of sense and i am satisfied with the documentation on the need for the towers. also the other speakers who spoke about the health concerns. again we're restricted by what the federal government allows as being an acceptable level of electronic magnetic emissions and if it's within that level we don't have any ability to disapprove based upon that, and yeah it's kind of iertion -- ironic a speaker used a device that requires the antenna to use it and if there isn't an adequate one you would have to use papers to make the

comments and you need enough antennas and it's going to get worse and people riding muni and i move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner. >> on the motion to approve commissioner. >> aye. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> comr moore. >> aye. >> commissioner with wu. >> commissioner president fong. >> aye. >> that passes unanimously and puts you on item seven at 975 bryant street. conditional use authorization. following public testimony the commission continued the matter to this date. the matter before you is a motion to disapprove.

>> is there staff on this jonas? >> i apologize diego sanchez is not present and i believe jewel an is present. >> would staff like to introduce this project? >> yes. commissioners we don't really have anything further to add follow your intent to disapprove from last week. we drafted a motion for your review in the packets and i believe commissioner antonini wanted this off of consent so i leave it to you. >> okay. public comment on this item? you can leave that on

the bench there. >> my name is jerry wolf. i am here again today to talk about what is proposed use of the property for new store but specifically i was here last time to talk about kate street, the alley that i own a property on and we were concerned that orchard would use that as the sole means for freight loading and i am here representing two of my neighbors and couldn't be here because of the short notice . they own the building at the end of the block and i own the other one and we own the last 150 feet of the street. in the last hour i talked to the

gentleman from orchard and they made a concession that will change my speech now. we have been negotiating for the last three weeks and reach out to us as members of the community and asking them not to use the loading now and corporate said they will accept that and remove the door on kate street and move back over to the parking lot where there was a pre-existing door and the tenant blocked up when they took over the space. this will be a little burden for them because they need smaller trucks. it's on the private property and makes myself and my two neighbors to say we're not opposed to the project anymore and we basically are willing to go along with it. i want to make one comment though to the hardware people here at the original meeting and say something. i am a small businessman. this is a 33,000 square feet building and

parking and inevitably some corporation will take it over. the reason pacific sales is leaving because they can't afford to stay in the space because of the rent. it will be a big corporation and that's the way the world exist and inevitably the building is there and has to be used by a corporate large store and the fact that orchard was willing to reach out to us and save kate street and no presence and we get a future on our little street and there are under used properties on the street and used as new residential and means those developers are willing to do something there because they made the compromise. thank you.

>> president fong, commissioners, my name is mike ayers and i lead efforts at orchard and i was surprised to this this pulled from the consent calendar and now feel compelled to make a few comments. thank you for your time. thank you for the lessons regarding the proper amount of public input and dialogue on a project of this scale. we learned a lot in the last couple of weeks. if we're given more time we will work hard to gain the support of the neighborhood and the san francisco community at large. thank you. >> additional public comment? >> good afternoon commissioners. jim meeko from south of market. i think the most devastating

revelation two weeks ago when you heard this was the map when the small businesses, hardware stores, home improvement stores in the area passed out that map that showed the two block radius, six block radius and a 2-mile radius around the proposed location. in showing just how many san francisco businesses are involved in this from speedies hardware just two blocks aware. they're struggling to get established on folsom street and another hardware a couple of other blocks away and for the small businesses struggling to remain in this city. i ask you to maintain the commitment you made two weeks ago to the small businesses and to up hold this decision to redie this project.

thank you very much. >> any additional public comment? okay. seeing none public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> yeah, i will let you know why i asked this to come off of consent with a little background. i am old enough to remember in san francisco we had no national clothing retailers. if you were going for clothing you went to several stores and we lived in a different world. we lived in a world where the needs were met by local firms and had additional outs in the bay area but it's regional. we don't live in that world anymore. we are international. we have firms from other countries and located their outlets in the area. we have

small retailers and they have to survive in the environment and they can but they have to appeal to their customers because of service or other goods that they stock and what happens when you don't allow a major firm into an area they will probably locate close to the area and possibly daly city and other places and people do drive to specific places. an example of this is target. when target was not in san francisco people would drive as far as they had to do shopping there, and this is also true to some degree for hardware stores. i think there are a number of people i talked to inside and outside of san francisco that appreciate the quality of orchard supply and they do their shopping there, not exclusively, but often for certain items that do, so i think it's kind of shortsighted to not approve it or possibly

at least allow another site in san francisco. it might be necessary to be down on bayshore boulevard where there are other box stores. maybe this isn't the best site but as the speaker pointed out it's a huge site and it's going to be a huge operation or sit vacant. the other thing is formula employers don't give enough benefits to the employees and i'm not sure if that is true and they may employ part time employees and bring people into the work force that are not employed otherwise. they have a part time job on to subsidize their full time work, a older people or a younger people supplementing their income. there is nothing wrong

with part time and i was at ground zero for retail and there are problems with that esthetically and it's not the thing i want to see, but when you go around they don't see as many social challenges and i am sure they have them but not as obvious as san francisco and i am not sure what the role of retail plays but i think a large significant part of the population is employed by the retail businesses. i'm not defending formula retail. i like to shop locally and support the firms but i think we need to look at this in the context of what is best for san francisco and some of the people looking for work in san francisco so i'm going to work against the disapproval and i would like to see this item continued. i don't think there is anyone that would second that but i would certainly propose that as a motion. >> commissioner moore.

>> excuse me if you could turn off all of your mobile devices. >> the testimony which we heard last week has not been disputed or modified by anything i heard today. i think we very wisely observed something which required our attention and the position present d today has not changed my mine. i feel everything is intact to disapprove the project and i think we move forward to do that as we were asked to do. >> second. >> call the question. >> if i could. thank you. well, i was tempted to second the motion to continue i don't think we have the votes to did that today and i think the project sponsor understands with a little more time and come back and re-examine the approach in san francisco but i wanted to

explain my position on this, and very clearly i'm not flat out opposed to formula retail or support of it. in the case -- in these situations for me you need to look at each location by location case by case, and i think this particular location pacific sales is owned by best buy. it's their larger appliance store. it's a big box, large format. likely another user of that magnitude will come in. rei is essentially next door. it's on bryant street. we would like to see more pedestrian activity but it's a large thoroughfare. there is appropriate parking and the most compelling reason that he we will hear it's an area for growth in san francisco and both for office and housing and i think in the near feature

future parcels will be there and more housing and i think the store will serve a particular type of customers that are looking to improve their condo, their apartment, or home in that area, so the other part is i don't want -- i don't think it's necessary to drive for one piece of lumber or screw. that's i didn't am supportive and i will be with commissioner antonini and vote against the motion to deny. commissioner moore. >> i think nobody said that having formula retail disapproved in one location doesn't mean they can't find other appropriate sites and the proper support from the surrounding community and businesses that stand in front of us and present a case whether it's possible. this commission

has approved a number of formula retail uses [inaudible] challenged to do so but it's a question how do you deliver a project and i wanted to add that further exemplifying what you said. >> thank you. commissioner hillis. >> yeah, just to clarify my view. it's both location and use. i don't think this is a bad location for formula retail. there is formula retail around there. there is the ninth street complex that has a couple of formula retail. i think the location coupled with the use and hardware stores have been historically difficult. to commissioner . antonini's point and i think hardware has a tougher battle in the city than other

uses like clothing so i just want to mention that it's both the use and the location. i think it would be good to engage the next location you look at and engage the folks that came out and testified and most were not the neighbors but the local hardware merchants. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to approve or adopt the motion -- excuse me, the motion to disapprove. >> commissioner antonini. >> no. >> commissioner aye. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> comr. >> aye. >> comr president fong. >> thats motion passes four-two. >> okay. the commission is

going to take a break and there is a time certain coming up. >> 2013. i would like that to remind people to turn off mobile devices. the commission doesn't have any out bursts at any time. we will take up the 330 calendar tit. first is up 18a, b and c for 250 fourth street and proposed to continuance at the request of the project sponsor. >> is there any public comment?

seeing none public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> on that motion. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> and commission president fong. >> aye. >> so moved that passes unanimously and that will be continued to april 4 of this year. next is 19 for 3450 third street request for discretionary review. this is a full discretionary review. >> good afternoon. i am wendy bend i guess from staff. you have. >> >> before us two permits that will establish a out patient clinic doing business as a wellness center at 3450 third street in the indian basin

special use district. the requester raised two primary concerns. 50 that the rezoning of the. >> >> property and without public notice or input. seconds that the analysis provided by the department of public health for the rezoning was manipulate and staff does not see that it met the extraordinary circumstances to take discretionary review. the relative rezoning was publicly noticed and vetted before the planning commission and board of supervisors and land use and economic development committee. it was passed unanimously passed by the full board of supervisors. official uses were considered principal uses under the

previously zoning controls. the changes to the property that was a result of the zoning eliminated or extended the limitations dedicated to these uses. in regard toos the site contamination the department has received any evidence that the subject site is contaminated. allegations pertain to hazard owses materials on other properties. the sponsor has done environmental analysis and recognized there are no recognized conditions from off site sources. in addition they worked with the department of public health and address potential things from off site and air quality and safe and noise. finally i received

additional letters of support and i will do so at the end the presentation and we haven't received any other from the dc requester. the department request that the commission doesn't take discretionary review. this concludes my presentation and i am available for questions. >> thank you. dr requester. >> excuse me. those of you standing at the doors we have been told by the sheriff's department that is a fire hazard and you have to move to the other side of the room or find a seat. thank you very much. >> good afternoon. i am espinola jackson of bay view hunter's point. the reason i requested a hearing is because

when the -- when this matter was heard the community was not notified. it's being stated that i am opposed to a wellness center. that is not fact. i am opposed to the area that was planned 3450 third street. we have people who were contacted and who contacted me as well. i would like you to know that the air in that area is very toxic. most of you -- some of you on this commission know that i have takenow tours of my area. what we are concerned with the fact and you will hear from other speakers 3450 third street is very toxic. it's right behind the sewage plant and the things in the air and i will go through and find out like i used to bring you all the time. i wish you would give this to the

commissioners please -- about the air in the area. i just heard my daughter today from cancer. most of the people in my community are lying left and right from the toxicity and from the sewage plant as well as the pg&e plant. we were able to get the pg&e plant closed because of the illness in my community. i want you all to understand that we tried to work with the doctor about another location because we do have what we have a help node on 3rd street that came under the redevelopment agency where health projects are supposed to be located but for some reason they wanted that location. people moved out of that building because of the

stench and the flooding there and when i saw the eir they tested a block and a half away, not where the building was. i think i mentioned to you before and i know you have the information in your packet about how the community bay view hunter's point was treated dealing with the shipyard. the health department -- i wouldn't trust anything they have to say about my community because my community is still dying from toxins because they were in cahoots with the epa. the director had to resign because not telling the truth about the community and the health problems the young and old people were receiving and asthma and breast cancer and another one came later i never heard of and young people before 50 and

blood doesn't go to the brain like it should and i talked to the doctor. i support you but in another area. in fact she met at my house on monday and we discussed it. i am not opposed to the wellness center. we need the services. we need all the services that we can get because when i go to a meeting and there are 49 people in the meeting and 49 of them said they were receiving money from the health department, and i said if you get that many people in the community saying they're from the health department we should be the healthier community in the united states but we are not. i buried my daughter today and had the funeral yesterday from cancer and i am tired of the people dying from cancer in the day view hunter's point. thank you very much.

>> >> jonas, do you want to make an announcement -- >> sure. if you wouldn't mind folks the commission doesn't tolerate disruption or out bursts so thank you. >> i'm going to call speakers who are in support of the dr. (calling speakers). >> first and foremost i would like to commend espinola jackson. she's 80 years old and celebrated her birthday and was commended by this city. she stated to you very clearly she just laid to rest her daughter because of cancer, and she came all the way from sacramento to be here and be on time for this

meeting. having said that the proponents came before the planning department some months ago during the holiday, and you commissioners passed on many blocks that was designated as industrial zones so you could accommodate the wellness center. after that i was at land use meeting and malia cohen who is the supervisor and has a lot to do with this project was not present. because she was not present the matter was continued. at the next meeting we had people for it and against it. as stated by ms. jackson we are not against well wellness center but it's a

mockery to build it in the center chernobyl. this is what the focus should be. black children, other children of color, all children should get state of the art health from the state of the art hospital, the womens' and children's hospital. we do not want a wellness center in the building and i have asked the planning department please send me the closure report. no report. why? because one time under neeghtd that building there was a gas station and they have fuel tanks there. why don't all the supporters of the wellness center stand by there and see if they can smell the stench from the sewage treatment plant. the tracks that go