the san francisco land use & economic development committee. i'm supervisor wiener the chairman the committee to my right is supervisor jane kim our vice chair additional to my left

is supervisor cowen our clerk is andrea and i want to thank sfgovtv for brovt the hearing specifically jonathan and jessie. madam clerk, any announcements?. yes. please silence all electronic devices. and copies of any documents should be submitted to the clerk and the items shall appear on the april agenda otherwise stated mr. clerk call item one >> to establish the face mounted site permit and . >> and okay. as we indicated this stem was heard at a full hearing reject due to a glitch in the fee norris of the newspapers we weren't able to act on it but we continued it to this week and had a public

comment reject. so item number one colleagues to refresh your memory is long overdue in terms of setting standards in the mr. president of surface mounted utilities on our centers the utilize, boxes it's received strong support will clarify and improve the process and require early public outreach in terms of the mr. president of those utilize boxes require a stronger relationship with the soourntd neighborhood and also require for example, the utilize placing the boxes allow for murals to be placed on the boxes and also requested greenery and maintain the greenery and make good faith

efforts to site the boxes on private property if this is a possibly and an early assessment about the technical feasibility of the under combroun the boxed. that's a brief recap we had a lengthy hearing last week and that's where we are today so colleagues from there's no comments or questions i believe madam clerk i think supervisor cowen wanted to be a co-chair so. okay. thank you cohen >> sure. >> thank you supervisor kim open up item one for public comment 3 cards (calling names) public comment is two minutes so come on up and you don't have to go in the order i called you. >> good afternoon. welcome

steven curry a resident of crocker amazon. one of the issues that i'm very concerned about it is process and the conversations between at&t and the public. on thursday i'm filing on appeal for one of the surface mounted facilities going into our neighborhood in a park where the emotions that that sent to me last week basically, the sacrifice mounted facilities are not allowed in the park do curb cuts to get into the park they've told the neighbors they've put that on the prefery part. that's not the only reason to appeal it there's no working relationship what i mentioned in

january about a conversation in mitigating the issues that the neighbors have either appealed or have concerns with there's no e-mails been sent i know you can't legislate being a good company or neighbor company but with at&t their needs to be something of them for the community. so i just wanted to bring that forward >> thank you. ms. olsen. >> good afternoon. welcome i very much appreciate the legislation donates a long time coming i have 3 tweaks i'm requesting section 2 seven hundred a e-1 the italics are to

be put in the replacement of the surface mound for the same utilize use be installed on the foundation and the same smaller ones. second next to be revised italics added and eliminates some the right-of-way eliminate the middle and include or insert prehigh school they're on the fringe of their description or have a traffic sign on the block and the public notice of intent to submit plantations to be revised to read the frobt address including the assessors block and lot for the period of locations. the reason for that at&t uses internal billing addresses that

are non-existing addresses so thank you very much >> thank you must olsen. >> ms. workingman we have others (calling names). >> good afternoon, supervisors dee dee workman from the chamber of commerce representing over 15 hundred businesses has reviewed the site permit we believe there should be a reasonable process for the public input above ground locations that enable the systems to be installed giving san francisco and the businesses the technology. however, is legislation is to sdurng any technology in the facilities and it will significantly increase the cost including the dpw and other

companies it will increase other fees of the planting and trees and it will increase the costs to businesses it don't think the internet for their businesses and it seems like that will delay the upgraded systems and reduce competition and the update high-speed delivery ability it should be elevated by the city controllers to ascertain this on depends as well as local businesses and heard by board of supervisors budget and finance committee before you vote on it >> thank you many workman. >> chairman and supervisors from the san francisco beautiful

thank you four co-sponsoring this legislation. remedy for private property including the small property owners and merchants that allow on the pedestrian access to their building fronts we think this legislation is going to improve the process by which community can participate and thank you for your support and look forward to seeing this legislation move forward so at least we can have it in neighborhoods and on the ground >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon, supervisors teddy director for external affairs for at&t. we want more clarity and certainty in the surface mounting fats order as it relate to our high-speed we have the proufl approval to put in the public right-of-way. i want to get this into the

record the 7901 we've expressed to you already the second thing is that the option of economic analysis is supposed to review the proposed legislation that comes too brown the board of supervisors there's been a demonstration no economic impact. i'm not an economist but i look at 5 hundred permits and the it by 75 hundred that's a 8 point millions impact >> 52 percent. >> so as we look at the requirement of the office of the economic they're to look at the

sustainability and prosperity plan specifically it called u calls out telecommunications this is not to do with any provisions it's only for the screening so the impact vs. no, i would ask that we just slow down a teeny bit and get it over to the financed to see the impacts of the city. >> the numbers you put up there that has to do with the requirement of at&t the questioning to plant the greenery around the boxes. >> yeah. on the proposed permits that are outstanding for the light speed produce. >> is there any additional public comment on to me okay.

seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor kim >> thank you. i want to thank i guess the dpw and the city attorney's office for walking through the steps. i still prefer an increased number of days now i understand the process how it fits tithe within the 60 daytime line i'm willing to forego the that amendment >> thank you for all who come out last week and could i i think spice it today where everyone stands this has been a challenging issue for the city. we know under state law with have constraints we can't band the utilities from placing their utilize boxed on our sidewalks they have right rights but we have the right to regulate the mr. president and make sure the

utility boxed are being placed in the niece of our community. when you look at what this requires in terms of doing early front loaded outreach to neighborhoods so instead of doing it in the current manner which is not as tight. when we look at the requirement we bring a broader area of the neighborhood together with at&t for other utilities identifying multiple sites where we only look at one site where the kick the can down the road this is a significant improvement to get it front loaded and deep community involvement in placing those large units on neighborhood situation i respectfully disagree with at&t the greenery and mural when

you're talking about placing very large 4 foot a little bit bigger on the people's on the situations outside of people's homes on the sidewalks it's a minor thick to ask that if we want to put >> mural on the box that the utility should permit. that if the community wants they're to be greenery around the boxes which everyone agrees it attractive and gets graffiti that's in the an unreasonable request so they should maintain the greenery as opposed to having the adjacent property owner so i'll say this came up last week, i did meet with at&t and at&t did send us a letter

expressing the concerns. we invited at&t understanding there's significant disagreements we won't agree on but addressing the concerns they have because there might be some amendments we agree to at&t limited their letter to the philosophical agreement between the murals and unfortunately, it was a fair limited back and forth in her opinion of the issues and it's not a criticism of at&t they've you disagreement with the elective i respect their rights to have the disagreement but i want to thank my elective aid in getting this done and all the cities

departments that are extremely helpful including the city attorney's office. supervisor cowen >> one of the issues i've heard from my constituents is a desire to see the murals along the boxes i think the at&t rep is in the room you guys are prohibiting people the ability to put murals or paint on the utility boxed because of the painted compromising the integrity of the box? >> ms. rehas. >> good afternoon supervisor cowen i'm with at&t. the new light speed cabinets have a recidivist you'll get a

missouri and look like washed out watercolors so that's the first thing on the graffiti vs. the second thing did your office want to be the ash take care of art >> no, we have an art commission that determines what's art so the public art around the city that's what on the public right-of-way; right? >> open a private utility cabinet on a bona fide cabinet. >> so certainly we don't need the defeat but helpful if there's more flexibility i want you to sustain on this filmmaker you're putting on the new cabinet you described in the anti graffiti. >> so that comes with a warrant

on the cabinets to maintain. >> what's itself name of the company. >> al can tell. >> thank you. so that comes with a warrant to maintain the temperature in the cabinets because inside the cabinets are computerized technology they have fans in the cabinets to help maintain the temperature but when you put dark colors the manufacturer says we can't guarantee it so we taken that question back hundreds of times at this point since 2005 and that's the reality of the warrant >> do all seven hundred and 26

cabinets have this coverage. >> yes. the cabinet idea i want to be real clear we took that back and asked the city why they don't allow it on their structures in the public right-of-way we haven't gotten an answer he want to know why they're not included in the legislation. >> so on the murals mta there are mta traffic control boxed for example, the church. >> on third and oakdale. >> the city is willing to do that there's interesting there are large box as i recall there were box that were temporarily removed and there was an outcry and since been