>> so, you know, usually i have coffee at the corner of irving and the 22nd a lot and i have difficulties in walking and my legs hurt and every time i try to open the door, even to the coffee shop, it's very difficult. if there's anything that, you know, like at&t wish to put a big box in, they could move to

other places, not on this corner. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. (speaking through interpreter). >> so, i use 22nd and irving street corner donut shop a lot and i would like to spend long

times and talking to friends over there and, you know, to actually what [inaudible] is not an sfm box over there but we hope that if we can use the sidewalk, some tables and chairs that we can have a street side cafe. thank you. >> does the gentleman care to state his name for the record? >> ky yee yu. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> commissioners, my name is richard you, i'm a resident at chinatown, benny yee, [inaudible] for of years, it drum up some business for the chinatown shopping, and then he

have -- benny yee have a very high reputation among our chinese all over san francisco, and when they come into the city matters, you know, planning, streets, other activities, he would give his advice, his wife, we respect it and most of the times, it is very useful, and i'm a retired postal worker, but i do not represent the post office. i have lots of guys working in the postal station on 22nd avenue and, you know, the postal worker always have to bring that, you know, mail, that delayed package, so i hope you will place whatever it is from the at&t elsewhere, do not

block the people going in and out of the post office. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment? please step forward. >> good evening. my name is thai ho, i'm the donut owner and i'm [inaudible] almost every day, and it's very hard to open the side door because the big box over there and i see it as a lot of -- you know across the street, that's

an opening and i don't know why they don't put it over there, i just hope at&t can move the box , so that's it. >> did you bring something to show us on the overhead? >> yeah, the picture. see right here the window and the box is right here. >> is the box on that photograph, is the cabinet on the photograph? i don't see it, so is that -- >> i think it's over here. you cannot see -- >> okay, thanks. >> okay, thanks. >> thank you, is there any other public comment?

>> my name is lee young chow, my 83 years old mother is a devoted buddhist and on 22nd or 21st and irving, there is a buddhist temple there and every week, i will have to drive my mother-in-law over there to practice buddhist and a lot of times because the area does not have adequate definite handicapped parking places, i have to look around that, and quite often that i have to use parking space around irving and 22nd, so the problem i want to echo the previous speakers

talked about, not only children use strollers but if you have a senior with a disability that you have to load, unload the wheelchair and then assist them to get out of the chair, you understand that a lot of times, that a sidewalk curb between the service facility is only leaving not much room for wheelchair to prepare to load people in, and you know, i would -- i don't want to repeat anything else, but it does create people with disabilities of a solid, you know, obstacles here, not about a landscape or something, at least you can wheel over it or at least you won't totally block your way, but here, if you actually, if i drove around and try to look for a parking space, i will try to avoid those because it just

practically you cannot have this access in those places if you have a facility over there, so i'm echoing all the previous speakers that we are opposing the locations and i hope you can grant the appeal. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioner, my name's amy lou, a long term tenant of mr. yee, mr. benny yee for over 20 years. he is a very responsible landlord. once when i received a notice from -- about the smf and last year on april 19th, i gave the notice to mr. yee and then he

did not receive anything before that, so he -- he's hoping to go to the hearing against having the smf there, but obviously he did not get any notice about the hearing. i was very surprised too when in february when i received that humongous -- saw that humongous thing pop up on the street and i was outraged and went to his office and everybody is talking about how those things are blocking people's ways to get in and out of cars. i have a picture, you have a better view of this. >> turn it over so that it's facing you. could you turn it so that you're looking at it. perfect. >> so, do you see that thing? the smf?

it's blocking people, how people cannot get in and out of their car, and then do you see that big truck parking there, the post office truck is always in the morning, in the afternoon, in the evening, it's parking there to unload their stuff and this is -- they always have double parking. it's busy enough for anything to add on. and then i heard that the [inaudible] street is not enough space to put -- to relocate there. there's a sample on 9th avenue and kirkham. you can see that there's a bus stop, a red zone and also an

smf, it's very obvious. things can be -- the smf can be relocated. the distance between there is about 6 feet between the bus stop and the smf. there's another example, 22nd and -- the same thing. that's all i want to say. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners, thanks very much for such a hearing, my name is william mui, i used to live in sunset district, and i still go there very often and i don't think that, you know, the location that at&t is going to put a box there would be a good location

because the traffic over there is always heavy, there's lots of people and parking i would say is just terrible. every time i go there, it's hard to find parking and i have to park maybe two to three blocks away, that's why i believe that and also we can see this is very, you know, busy place, a lot of seniors and children, they always go over there to shop or for whatever reason, so i think that if they put a box over there, it will cause a lot of inconvenience to a pedestrian and all the people going there, so please consider this. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment? okay, seeing none, and we will move into the rebuttal phase and we will start with the appellant. >> thank you. so, i wanted to address several other things that have been mentioned by at&t's attorney, first her assertion that at&t provided extensive notice to the affected members of the

region, i think it's very clear that that fell short. there are at least two professional associations, the outer sunset merchants professional association and the irving street merchants association that never -- there was never any contact or discussion with them. i think what this shows is that at&t needs to go a little bit further than just doing a google search and searching some addresses and sending owl some flyers so they can comply with its memorandum of understanding, i think it needs to dig down and understand the areas that it is going to be affecting and i think that it is not -- that's not too much of a burden of at&t to have a better understanding of the neighborhoods it will be affecting, the issue of the extensive notice that at&t

outlined, they're confusing issue with the first notice and the second notice, if we were aware or not aware, we're not objecting to the first location, the dwe is whether -- question is whether or not there was notification of the second location, i want to address also very barfly an assertion that was made by mr. quan that the alternative locations may not include some place where there's a bus stop. we've seen a few examples and i'm not willing to represent or i'm not able to represent that those are necessarily at&t's boxes or telecommunication boxes, i don't know what those are but what it does show is that it is possible to place communications equipment or other types of technology cabinets next to bus locations

without it necessarily being -- those are two examples that were cited, i think if you drive around, you would never notice this unless you were looking for it, if you drive around in the city, you'll find dozens of examples, i find it hard to believe that given at&t has suggested there's a thousand of these cabinets that they intend to build out, this is the only sole location that will affect at&t to provide its communication services and i think any order, if this board were to uphold the department of public works' issuance for permit, i think we should put the dpw to the test and make sure they cite to you why alternative locations would not be suitable using actual guidelines. thank you. >> i have a question for you.

in at&t's brief, there is a copy of an e-mail sent to mr. yee on june 12th. >> that is correct. >> and it's indicated in the brief that that was notice of the dpw hearing, is it your position that your client did not receive that >> our client did not absolutely receive that and there's no dispute that there was never any further follow-up, as mr. quan indicated, it is only sent out to the objecting party, he already knew there was an objecting party, they need to go the extra step and not just send out an e-mail and on 15 days notice or whatever it is, we're going to have a hearing, by the way, if i don't hear from you, it's going to get granted. they had notice that there was an objection to it, i think it was incumbent upon them and not just send an e-mail but make an

effort to contact mr. yee. >> before you sit down, so what is the harm at this point in the absence of notice when your client is here today as a de novo proceeding, we're here to, you know, receive any evidence of the objections and the concerns raised on the merits, so what harm is there now for your client that can't be rectified based on the absence of the notice of the prior hearing? >> well, again, it goes to the issue of the merits of the appeal which is putting a box like this adjacent to -- i'm not representing it's directly in front of but adjacent to the u.s. postal service is just a horribly bad idea. >> i'm talking about the note. on a procedural basis, where is the harm to your client now that we are here on a de novo standard of review? >> because the box has been

placed. >> i understand it's not operative. >> well, right, but it's there and what we're here arguing is why it should be removed and why it shouldn't have been placed in the first place, it would be very easy for this board to simply say, well, it's there. >> we can order it to be removed. >> exactly. >> but you're supposed top present evidence -- everyone is talking and focusing on notice. you know, and the merits have been discussed to some extent by the public comments and yourself, but i'm asking about -- so, we could order it to be removed so that harm can be undone. is there any other harm to your client for the lack of notice if he did not receive that june 2012 e-mail. >> it's not like we're asserting any claim right now. >> that is a major focus of

your position, so we can't undo that but we're here today to start fresh. >> right, and i appreciate your de novo standard, it's comforting to hear that. we're not here to remedy the lack of notice issue, we want to really point out to this board and whatever this board decides, we think at the very least, it puts at&t on notice that they have to do a little more than just google some addresses, this not only affects clients in our case but many residents wherever these things get -- eventually get located so again, this is an opportunity to scrutinize at&t's notice procedures, i'm not asking this body to remedy this body's notice xwi sanctioning at&t or anything like that, we think the

appropriate thing would be the remedy and remove the box. >> but that would be on the notice? >> indeed. >> we can maer from the permit holder now. >> good evening, commissioner, i'm going to try to speak quickly because i want to show you guys some maps. that is diagram, it's kind of hard to see, so this is irving street and this is 22nd, this is the location of the cabinet, this is where the bus stop is on irving, it's on the other side of irving, mr. yee's property is here and the cabinet is here so to show you a scale, somebody put up a picture that made it look like it was towards the corner. let me start with this one, here's the corner so this is

the windows you were looking at on this photo, this is the cabinet, it is significantly down the street, it is in front of a blank wall, the post office that was mentioned is this building over here which is more clearly shown in this photographic which this is the cabinet, this is the post office, so it is located as far away from the entrance to mr. yee's property as well as to the post office as it can be, the picture you were shown of the car parked is an existing facility, that prior to the department's order, those citations did not exist, this is further away from the curb. >> what was the photo shown earlier? >> it was a different facility. >> do you know which exhibit it was? >> it was the one that someone

put on an overhead, so i just wanted to point out that the new guidelines do rear it to be set further back from the curb, the other quick points that i wanted to address. as to the department's guidelines exceed ada requirements, so the new distance is part of the ada, as well as talking about existing fa -- facilities next to bus stops as to the other locations, some streets mentioned were farther than 300 feet, one of the locations is across irving street over here so as to the locations, we're this far away from this direction, you can't get all the way to 21st street and still be 300 feet and walgreens

as a parking lot, we contacted them to see if we can put it in their parking lot, there's many curb cuts, driveways, there are so many restriction, we did walk the streets with mr. yee, we couldn't identify any location as i mentioned previously, as to notice, we gave not only two notices for the original location, two notices plus the door hanger, so five notices in total. criticism can be levied but we have done excessive and exceeding the city's requirements in terms of notice and as one last point, 7901 is the state law that says this type of equipment belongs in the right of way, this is where the city and st state has decided this is where this type of facility should be. do you have any questions? >> no, go ahead, vice-president. >> thank you. your exhibits a and c have the listings of mailings. what were the derivation of

those lists? >> they run a 300 foot property map. >> they meaning at&t? >> i believe so, yeah, they do that through using city data. >> and my second question is, i'm still confused about the need for this to be somewhere in the vicinity of 22nd and irving, there was some public testimony about it would be better at 23rd or 27th and i understood those were not viable options. >> the existing facility that i mentioned, this facility works in coordination in terms of it's the existing copper network na we have where we place this electronic switching equipment essentially and the signal strength weakens as you go out from the location, you can't get more than 300 feet away or it doesn't work. >> so, those intersections are not viable? >> where is it currently

located? >> right here at -- across the intersection, across both 22nd and irving. >> do you have any other illustration for us to see really where 300 feet -- >> i don't, i don't have a radius map. the notice, that list of addresses is as expansive as 300 feet, that's what i could offer in terms of what you have before you. i don't have a map. >> can i ask you to put that back up, the one with the red x. >> it's still up. >> okay. >> the red x is -- indicate it is bus stop for the bus line 71? >> correct. >> so, it's opposite the intersection. >> right sx, the bus pulls this way. >> so, no one's getting on a bus in front of this ?frjts no. >> is there any bus going up

and down 22nd? >> sorry, yeah, it's this way. >> so, where is the bus stop? >> on the corner. >> on the other side of the street? >> i didn't draw it accurately when i was sitting -- >> so, where do people get on and off the bus, on the other corner of the intersection, but they don't get on and off in front of the property? >> yes. >> and where is the market in relationship to -- >> the market is here, i drew that red line, there's a loading zone and i don't know exactly the extent of it, i put that there to remind myself that there is a loading zone which is on this corner. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> thank you. >> mr. quan? >> commissioner, john quan with the department of public works,

once again, there's been a lot of discussion as it relates to the notification, as it relates to the initial notification and notification for additional requirements, it was previously discussed, i don't think i can add anything substantial to it, but listening to the general public, there's been a lot of comments related to this location, there were suggestions there is significant congestion as it relates to the intersection that this is not an appropriate location for the facility. i must point out based upon what i heard from the public, the primary congestion appears to be vehicle of traffic in this case, there's double parking, there are suggestions about people looking for parking, there's suggestions that based on that, this is not in an appropriate location. i must point out, this facility currently is along the furnishing zone along the sidewalk, as previously shown

on the pictures that have been provided to this board, the sidewalk along irving street is 15 feet wide from the base of the building to the base of the curb, the location is shown for this box provides a minimum of 8 foot to approximately 10 foot of sidewalk behind the box to the property line, there's more than sufficient evidence of people to walk three, four breasts potentially, there were suggestions by the public that surface mounted facilities have been placed near bus zones, that these are older facilities, under the new guidelines as established by then director lee, the placement of these boxes has been denied to be placed in and around bus stops in order to provide better passenger loading for buses and also to clear certain clutter from

that, so the suggestion would be to suggest that we can place these surface mounted facilities at bus stops would be in direct contradiction to the order that was issued by the department. there was suggestion by the merchant that they want to place cafe tables and chairs along 22nd avenue, the department would love to work with them so see if they can put cafe tables and chairs along the sidewalk area if it helps [inaudible] the neighborhood in how service is presented, that it provides an area that they can rest and congregate, we believe it is an appropriate location, we will work with them and make sure that can happen. other than that, we still believe the placement of this box from a technical perspective is appropriate because there will be no congestion from pedestrian,

it should not impose impediment to passenger loading and unloading. i'm here to answer any questions you may have. >> mr. quan, an earlier question i made to you about whether this conformed within the 300 foot relationship to their existing equipment, you indicated that that answer lied with at&t. then my question to you then is what does the department require from them to indicate that they have complied with looking at appropriate alternatives? >> as any utility provider, they would request a location to the department for -- under the surface mounted facilities order, we evaluate that location to make sure in these kind of cases as it