activity >> is there any other public comment on this item? public comment is closed. commissioner borden >> i'm familiar with this cafe why do you inside the other space i don't know why the move i'm curious about the move. >> it's more of a question for the project sponsor. >> donates a great question. actually, it was a have small space and the landlord raised the rent and accompanied president coincidely there was a chance to move the store. there was another spot did you look at that space >> that was before my time and a thanks. >> good question. >> i mean it's a beautiful

building and obviously their merging them and obviously pete's could use more space. it could have been a neighborhood servicing cafe now, it's a clothing store pop up >> thanks for the history. >> in terms of the motion it does have the liaison. the steam cleaning would we add that as a condition of approval >> with regard to steam cleaning it's not required by department it's now required by department of public works. >> could we endorse it. >> yes. >> in terms of the condition i

guess about not using the back patio for any kind of business use and i think odor control there's an item here in the motion that deals with the odor i don't know about the garbage but anything additional. >> perhaps i could speak to that. typically odor condition is placed more on restaurants or self-service restaurants because of venting gas or cooking. and in this case it would seem reasonable they discontinue with their other existing business so if the commission wants to

strike that importantly that would be okay >> is that condition 7 or 18? both of those can be potentially be struck. commissioner anton >> i'm supportive of this and even though we can't require the steam cleaning i certainly would like to see it as a finding and encourage it but many of our streets have gum from 20 years ago it's disturbing when you see those sidewalks.

so retailers can do whatever to keep them clean it's encouraged >> commissioner wu. >> we were reminded that for poor conditions we should state some conditions. i'm supportive of the back patio to limit the noise for neighbors >> (laughter) . commissioner >> i don't think that precludes them from come back for a future date for another conditional use hearing. >> is there a motion? move to approve with conditions as set forth by the board and on that motion commissioners to

approve as moved (calling names) so moved commissioners that passes unanimously 7 to zero. item fourteen has been continued to october 10th so this places you on 15. at 1700 union street. request for conditional use authorization

>> good afternoon president fong planning department. at&t seeks to build a maximum 3 story building within the union street neighborhood commercial district. the proposal allows for 3 antennas and one antenna would be to mimic the remaining two antennas would face the northeast facade. there are health concerns and the need for the site, historic

attributes of the building and there would be electric cabinets and would reflect the cabinet within the guidelines and we recommended use of approval of authorization >> thank you. >> project sponsor please. >> good afternoon president fong and members of the commission arrest i'm a director for at at california. i'm joined today with the firm of edison whose professional

engineer and engineering firm that conducted the radio frequents at the site and his analysis is part of our packet payroll i'm joined with other folks. we're seeking an approval to place 3 antennas a small site one mount on the roof on union street. the necessary equipment will be located on the ground floor in the building. once this is on site at&t will be commissioning a site on union. it's located under the city's wireless guidelines and at&t conducted a thrower site analysis included in your packet. the site is necessary for at at to close a network in and around

uncle street in the marine a district of the student. as you are aware wireless services is in demand because of smart phones and they announced we're almost 3 hundred percent rows and projects traffic to grow. we ask for your support in approving the application today and i'm valley available for any questions i might have >> that's the extent of the project sponsor? so public comment. i have a couple of cards. john, julie and another lady. >> president fong isn't here but

fellow commissioners i have appreciation for your patience seeing what you do and i will sorry for your ears. my family lives at the 27 golf street next to the proposed project. we look at this proximately from our bedroom and backyard. if i'm my family has been here since 1948. we know the city. with regards to this project the 1700 union street location is a poor choice. first of all, if the owner of the building would have said no to the project at&t would have found another site for the antennas. so the project doesn't have to

be on this site. in saying that it makes no sense for a project like this to be constructed on, on exposed corn with high vibrator. if you're coming down golf street you have the obamacare gone house on the left and this building directly in front of you. it seems like an odd choice. although zoned within the commercial this building is on the fringe of the residential neighborhoods. this project in my opinion should be constructed in the middle of the commercial district between fillmore and not on a visual corner. i don't think this project would be approved if it was on the

other fringe street towards union. if the project has to be on this place place the equipment to the far west of the building. to reduce the visual impact for neighborhoods and pedestrians this would be highly helpful. this is a modest request. from what i understand the original plans have changed, have improved but are not available to be reviewed which max or makes no sense. i suggest we look at those before it's constructed. thank you. thank you >> thank you. >> hi i'm julie.

like my husband just said we live next door less than 20 feet from the author and building. i would like to talk about this to our young and urban born children. like other families we're worried about the impact of strong emissions on our children. it would seem much better if this project were installed in the middle of the commercial district instead of at the border of the residential district. i know that letters and information has been posted but all the families if i spoke to they don't read those notices

because they don't feel they have the power to influence those decisions. i was made aware of this project a few weeks and i bring up this fact to recommend true make up to see test the neighborhoods reactions. most importantly as a mother and a friend of the other parents of the neighborhood this project scares us and brings up serious concerns for our children and we don't know the effects of the new equipment. those are legitimate concerns and better alternates and sites must surely exist for ass projects. thank you >> thank you. i'm candice i live on green

street across the the allen park and 1700 union street is viewed from all levels of my house. you already have a letter outlining my concerns. while i appreciate at&ts need to improve their stoifrs the neighboring areas this is a poorly conceived crude decision that desecrates the architecture of this building. you have a packet that shows you photographs this is a buff building and this is is making restraining order site there are pieces that are the size of a boxcar that will add another level to the building.

it also should be considered that anyone traveling traveling up golf street are going to when they reach the intersection this is the first section of victorian san francisco that they see. this is the gateway to what we're selling 90 in san francisco. it's the first thing they see when they get off the muni bus. the latest at&t design contains humanely elements that the boxcars equipment made of chain link and can i go debar shaped antenna and all visible from the sidewalks that surround the units and even from the lower

elevations. it's designed as one of our cities potential historic resource building and i'm hoping you'll protect the historic nature of this section. if you haven't, please come and visit this intersection between the building on the northeast corner the obamacare gone museum and this is a gateway to the historic part of the city. thank you >> thank you. any further comment on this public nelson mandela item? that seeing none, public comment is closed >> commissioner anton. >> well, first of all, on the emotions we're obliged we can't

use this as a means to not approve a project and judging from the report those emissions are well below of the standards allowed by federal regulation. however, the question of aesthetics we can consider and i might want to ask the rep from at&t or from - yeah. if i could give me an idea if those elements could be moved to the middle of the building not seen from the street. and that's part of our staff report to move the site those elements so unless your above it looking down if you're walking or driving along the street wouldn't see the elements and a

sure. commissioner anton i'm with at&t. we starred with the panels of antennas on the roof and have ended up with 3 panel antennas. we've had full pipes and some side mounted would we could get down in terms of design was to facade mounted fully screened and one pipe. so if i as all of those antennas if i move this antenna back towards the center of the building i have to bring it up. the further i go back the higher the antenna gets and the more visible it gets. so there's a limitation on the emissions that come off the antenna that works where they're

related to close to the edge of the building. if i looked at the photographs and the pictures it mixes with the neighborhood. i understand what you're saying and there's one misrepresent that's apparently on the side of the building although it's not parted of the original building it looks like it could be. that's correct. there's two mounted antennas on the side and there are two on the side that the city has helped us to make sure they fit with the color of the building. and there is no fiber or cables coming down off those that are bringing blight to the building >> i would encourage you and staff to work with the neighbors

to, you know, do whatever we can to make the aesthetics as good as possible. i know you always try to do that. the other question that came up was citing it on another building and you gave us a number of alternatives and they were not as desirable but there was some talk you could comment on a citing further down union closer to fillmore if that would meet your goals of coverage any better or worse. i know there's some tall buildings on buchanan. >> certainly the search ring is small and specific. unfortunately, we don't have a lot of room to move the

misrepresent to aid the coverage gap in this area. i know we've had a lot of correspondence and we've tried to as best we can make it as small as we can and blend in as well as we can without moving it because the search ring - we would have to kill it and it wouldn't serve the needs of that area >> i'm familiar my dentist office is close by. and in that two or three block area it's a fairly small ring >> thank you >> thank you. >> commissioner moore.

>> i'd like to read you like the discussion as i do almost every time about the aesthetics to be part of this. while the west facing antenna off union street is not as much as a concern to me. the corn location is partially because this neighborhood didn't have underground utilities it makes it for more impacting rather than an additional antenna in an r f transparent vent. the vent is right literally next to the corn. i used to live across golf

street and i appreciated the solidness and the historic building on the corner. i don't believe adding the vent open the corn is a good move and i won't support it patricia because we need to start thinking about visual impact. and this is too much. >> commissioner hill us. >> i would agree aestheticly i have less concern with the lead pipe but the additions on the facade doesn't work. it's not like the facade houses a lot of utilities but especially on golf where you see you know the architecture of

this building we're adding this growth to it that doesn't work at all. we have to do more work of the aesthetics and it changes the character of what is an old building by adding this on the side. so i can't approve this >> i would agree ask at&t continue this and move this to another location on the building but i would tend to agree that the location closer to the corn is problematic. >> let me be clear you're asking us to move the facade antenna to the vent roof and move those up. >> i'd like to see that. sound like commissioner moore is more concerned about the rooftop i'm concerned about the facade.

>> could we - i mean would it be advantageous to continue this and have you worked on this to see if there's a solution. >> i'm happy to do that. we started with that several years ago but you want to put this on the agenda next week we'll come back in two weeks with our original designs and compare them. are we're caught in a little bit of - >> it's the shock clock. >> it's beyond that shock clock. if we come to the planning

department with bare antenna and we screen them and can't get them passed it's a prohibittion and violates our code. i'm happy to bring it back. if the department asks us to screen the antennas and then - >> with the timeframe i'm curious. >> so the time limit is 1 hundred and 50 days. so we're way beyond this we've been working on this design for two years. so we go through italy ration after italy ration this is the design we came at and if we can't find a solution we'll go

back to the bare antennas and we'd rather not side that. i'm happy to continue the item for tweaks >> unfortunately i don't think we have the support for the project today & so and maybe just as a point of clarification for staff maybe earlier in the process when your reviewing the antenna you can look at the packet and prevent it from getting to this point because there's frequenting federal regulations and other things involved. the staff sees things differently than the commission so to have it in the packet is worthwhile >> we're going to look at different sizes and location for

the antenna. patricia it was a concern if there's too much bulk or alternatives made to the building given it's challenges it doesn't include the antennas on the too primary facade for example, but we're happy to work with the applicant further >> commissioner anthony i. >> yeah. i think we should continue until october 3rdrd. that's two weeks i believe and yeah. will we'll put it for october 3rd >> that's my suggestion. >> those are some suggestions.

perhaps it's a matter of aesthetics and how the antennas are housed. i don't like them on the sides nor the top but in many case i have a top vertical approach to this may be staff you could work with them especially on the golf street side. i don't know if the other commissioners would agree but maybe if that it was more horizon it could look more like the windows that are on the side. you know what i mean? like a phobia window >> maybe as a vin angle. that's also an issue on the facade. i don't know if that