you. >> any public comment on this item. this is by the association, i would ask that officers speak on the time allotted to the parties and not on public comment. >> commissioners, thank you for your time tonight. my name is thomas gulf mcgiven. i live at 21 quintara at the proposed location by at&t. when i moved to this street quintara, the street was a dumping ground for unwanted debris. garbage. the community and my family have turned this into a beautiful place. it is truly a beautiful

spot. as you drive down south, ask any of the neighbors, ask anyone about this space. has it changed for the better? yes. our city should protect and cherish the transformation of open space such as these. why at&t picked 203 quintara is hard to understand. they were permitted to put the box in down the block. they had the ability. they that had resources to put the box down the block on the original subject that this man just talked about. at&t has been a little bit misleading. they put flyers in our mailboxes that weren't very truthfully accurate as to their intent. they did not seek to work with our neighborhood or at least with my portion of the neighborhood in their choosing of the spot though they

claim. they did not get the community input. i claim they made this decision on their own with over 40 signatures from the immediate neighborhood with letters from everyone who lives around 201 quintara. i struggle. plus golden heights neighborhood association against the box also. at&t did not work with the immediate community. the neighborhood. they did not vet the process properly. who will pay for the upkeep of the cost of this at&t new proposed spot? not at&t. who will be liable if someone is hurt carrying for this site? not at&t. this is a box within feet of my home from full view of my living room where my children and neighborhood children's play,

at&t is putting an unneeded burden on my family. outside of manhattan san francisco is the most densely populated city in the united states of america. we need to protect open space like this especially when the community and neighborhood work so hard to beautify and care for such places. finally identify great -- i have great respect for at&t. my aunt worked for it forever. at&t has to respect the community of individuals. at&t has to be a good corporate citizen. they have not worked with the community and with the neighborhood. the permit is unlawful. it was inadequate as a way of notification. >> sir, your time is up. >> thank you very much for your time this evening. >> thank you. any other public comment? okay, seeing none,

we will start our rebuttal. mr. moreno, you have three minutes.3 minutes. >> i just wanted to know that i do in fact live half block from the proposed site and never received a notice about the box walk. there is significant community opposition. don't penalize us in this area for just being the third one. they need to find a place that is not going to have 41 neighbors opposing it. there is open space. it is in every sense of the word open space. just please don't penalize us. the community person that he mentioned does not represent the neighborhood association. i have been on the board for almost 10 years now and never heard that person's name. they do not do outreach to the neighborhood. >> i think they just

mentioned the name of one individual whom i know. i would like to see this on the screen here real quick. is it possible? no. is it possible to do it? no. well, it shows the nine feet 9 feet that will be taken up. this is not a five 5-foot box. this is a nine 9-foot by six six 6-foot cement by four 4 feet wall. this is a huge installation at the entrance of the site. i wish i can show you the video and perhaps i can because coming from across the street you can see right here, here comes, this is the site with all the beautiful new plants that come up every year with changes every year. this is all the beautiful natural areas is like all the natives. this is when you come in. this is the lowest part of the site, right here at the entrance. this is where the lines are that needs to be taken care of. everybody goes

here at this space. >> i don't know if it can be seen. then you go e to the east side and it is a lot harder to get up into site. it very steep. you are not, i'm not going to be able to show you everything on this video. what i want to say that definitely that space is nine 9 feet with 4-foot walls all around it is not why this notice here. whatsoever. not even close. this notice was misleading. it prevented people from really voicing their opinion. those people who opened that mail who looks like junk mail and people after that are able to read it and come to the hearing and spend the time. this whole process is extremely exclusive of community input. at&t did not reach out to really include more people in the

whole process. finally i would like to say that, mr. blake man did say to me that if neighbors have no suggestions from where to place the cabinet, then a face to fees meeting is probably not necessary to minimizing to the importance of the face-to-face meeting which by the notice nobody understand what these box walks are. none of this information is given to the public ahead of time. by the way, this has been a huge education of volumes of information that not every assesses tries -- citizen tries to learn. this is 40 feet away from their box. the 300 -foot is only flied -- applied from the convenience. >> your time is up. before you sit down, i have a question on the visual is helpful to me. is that open space, we heard that it may not be technically

open space. is it private property owned by anyone you may know? >> that is the space, the space, i'm sorry, some of this is definitely -- >> you are off the clock. i'm asking you a question. >> so the areas of not improved street is a continuation which dead ends there. it is owned and managed by dpw and as we know it's been stated in the open space plan is that we don't have enough resources in the city to carry over open space. it has well open space. there is the program of the streetcar program. that the dpw run program and we have several times that we help with additional people. they really have helped us. they really have helped the open space. >> okay. that helps with my question. >> i have a question as well. one of my major concerns has

always been notification. the attorney for the permit holders indicate they made several attempts and spoke with you regarding box walks and attempted to communicate with you and said that you were not available to attend any of these meetings or to meet with them. thoos -- this is how it works, i was not aware of any box walks available. even though it was done near my house they never let me know they were going to do a box walk because they had abandoned the other side. they probably contacted the people that objected that they were going to change their mind and they got one of those people who lives at 2094, 12 avenue. he was trying to make it, he's probable lau the only one that they ever included. >> so what interactions have you had with at&t? >> i had countless e-mails

that we are opposed to this and we are still looking for other locations. i don't even know what an alternative location was. they said you have to consider all the limitation, the ordinance limitations. at&t limitation, that's a lot of information. >> in the correspondence did they ever ask you can we meet, can we sit down? >> this is absolutely, let me show you the problem is they settled that and they said however, but. so, yes, i would be happy to meet with you. this is most of the e-mails which they did not include my response to them. they said they were going to come out and send their engineers to take another look at the 2096, 12th avenue area because there has been some showing up of the hill sides to help. i said before we propose new locations we would like to revisit some of the locations that you already looked at

meaning the area of mendoza avenue. >> i'm trying to clarify the communications because the permit holder said they made several attempts. >> the box walk, they said, we would be happy to meet with you, however we've made up our mind is basically what they said. >> so you never denied meeting with them. so if they said we are going to meet tuesday, wednesday, 2:00 you never said no? >> this is what they always said wechl would be happy to meet with you. it takes so much time, but i can look for the e-mails. we would be happy to meet with you however we have explored all the options. this information is in some of your briefs. if you look at the language, however, but, i have to tell you that we have exhausted the options. >> even after they said however, and but did they

ever deny meeting with you. >> the last time they never responded to that e-mail. i said i would like to have members of the board with me, i would like to meet with you to take a look at the area that has been showed up for you to reconsider that and reconsider mendoza. i never got a response at that point. >> whens that? >> that was specifically right before, it was before our time was finishing for the appeals deadline. >> do you have that? >> if you will it me find it, i will bring it. >> here is a meantime of the site today. >> i would actually like to just -- like to add that to put the burden on the people

who are objecting to a specific location to say that we need to come up with an alternative location. >> your time is up. we are asking a specific question. >> someone asked a question before. >> i have it right here. >> is it noted as a particular in your brief? >> no, the interesting thing is i didn't include any of our communications. they did. they did include this last one. >> can you set it down on the overhead, please. >> here we go. this is the last one. in the photo you are referring to blah blah blah. they might have included this which says i have asked engineers to go back and look back at the retaining walls and the cabinet would still not be protected even if the

retaining wall was not built. >> i'm sorry, can you wait one second. we would like to take a look at the document in context. it's kind of hard to see on the screen. would that be okay. i would like to see the document. >> this is related to have a significant box walk. the box walk to do what? so you can ignore me in person? >> hold on one second.

>> so the chronology is in back wards order. >> by the way, when mr. blake man proposed that i join him for a box walk and said if the neighbors have no suggestions to place the cabinet in a face-to-face meeting that would not be necessary. at that time i would have no idea what suggestions for additional boxes meant. >> okay. we need to provide

it to the permit holder. thank you. i have nothing further. thank you. >> thank you, ms. moreno. >> sure. >> mr. johnson, when you are ready, if you need a minute to look it over, please feel free. well, i think that oh you are brief in the e-mail correspondence establishes that at&t made effort to community with ms. moreno, the last e-mail marked march 24th. the excavation was granted march 19th. the order was

granted back in february. at&t had numerous telephone conversations and e-mail conversations back in the fall of 2013 long before the hearing which is how this process is supposed to work. it offered to meet with ms. moreno. she wasn't interested doing that at the time. she didn't become actively in meeting with at&t until after dpw approved the permit. at&t as you know is also required to provide the department with all of the mailings that it does to everybody in the neighborhood. so, if you were to look at the application package that is part of our brief, you will notice that there is a substantial number of people. every property owner within 300 feet is notified and 20 different community organizations.

conducted three different box walks. i don't know in this particular neighborhood how much more community outreach at&t could have done. but certainly complied with the spirit of the smf order. finally on a legal point there hasn't been any evidence on the hearing or this evening that the utility location would in implement the public right-of-way. i would therefore request the board deny the appeal. >> i think as the process is a defective one then there is another way to deny the permit. i have a question on the box walk. the third one, the first two were with john lee who held himself as being

a representative of the community. >> the way the box walks are conducted there is a mailing to the neighborhood. >> i get that. who was with the box walk with you? >> yovp a list with me this evening. >> maybe your client does? >> good evening, teddy. i went on all of those box walks with john lee. health -- he is say member of that community on that big sand wall on the sand dune area. he was there, two other members of the community were there and our entire staff was there. >> are you talking about the first and the second? >> the one where she was standing looking at us out of the window wearing yellow. >> that's the second location. >> that's the second

location. >> what about the third location, the one at issue. >> this is 203 quintara. >> the second location. i thought there were two prior in the factual records. the third one is the one you are referring to as the second one? >> yes. >> okay. got it. am i correct? what she was referring to is the one at issue. the site as issue. >> what i'm telling you what's in the record that at&t did a mailing effort they did a box walk and one of the problems with how this process works is that if people don't come to the box walks -- >> i'm sorry, you are making argument. i just want the facts. if you don't mind i would like the facts again

because i'm not clear. the one that your client attested to has to do with the site at issue. that's enough for me. >> i have a question. i'm still interested in substantiatation of the appropriation. >> well, let me make two points in that regard. according to mr. blake man who i spoke to, at&t has since this appeal was filed sent one of it's engineers out to evaluate the site and determined that it can't safely install the smf at this site because of continued erosion. it's not a viable location for the cabinet. the legal point i would like to make in a real sense whether or not at&t can install a cap -- cabinet the location is

irrelevant. the permit can't be denied. >> if you pulled a permit then it was a preferred site at one time. you voluntarily abandoned it on the basis of the engineers and technology, is that correct? >> yes, our engineers and city inspector as well. we went out with an inspector and looked at that spot. we do what is a preconstruction meeting before we start our construction and that's how we learned about the rock slides and mud slides at that location. with with respect to the letter that ms. moreno sent out and she said something would support that wall and we didn't see any substantial work that would prevent necessity -- any erosion there and we thought it was not a safe for

our workers and our equipment. i do believe it was for the inspector for the inspector meeting. all of the construction work prior to excavation commencing have a preconstruction meeting with the dpw inspector. >> i gather there was no neighborhood opposition at that site, that it was a technical issue. >> i wouldn't say there was no opposition, there was opposition at that site because it too had a departmental hearing before that excavation permit was granted. at the time it was preferable location. once we withdrew that permit and there was a more acceptable location by the majority of the members that came to testify at the hearing. then dpw ultimately made the decision to grant us

that excavation permit and not for, we went to considerable time effort and money to build at that location and not for the inspectors evaluation of the safety issues there. we would have built there after spending a lot of time and money on that. so it was not, something we pass ed off lightly. it was unsafe for our workers at that location. >> i have a couple questions. do you have a copy of that report indicating that it is an unsafe environment. >> it's not reported. they are verbal. there are site visits. >> the other questions that came up. how far is the site that you want to do now from your box a to box b. someone said it was 340 feet. >> it is within 300 line feet with the current cabinets. >> the conversation with dpw then the representative from

dpw probably can verify that it was a dangerous or hazardous place? >> yes. and going on record regardless of any dpw say that. if our inspectors believe it to be unsafe. >> do you have a copy from you are inspectors? it was verbal? >> it was a verbal inspection and it was agreed upon that it would be unsafe. if you would like to get something in writing we can get it to you. >> that might be an option. >> let m i clarify, mr. lee was written up by dpw inspector as having that unsafe sound wall next to his house because it was coming down to the street. there should be a violation on mr. lee's property on record for that. >> okay. thank you. >> can we bring john quan back

up, please. >> he's got time for rebuttal. mr. kwan. >> i was listening to the rebuttal from both parties. there is nothing to add because it is an issue between the appellant and any issues you have in this case. i'm here to answer any questions. >> the question stated that dpw indicated that it was an unsafe environment for the original location. that your inspectors during the presomething walk stated that it was a hazardous place. and if your inspector did state that and during this presomething walk, would that be something that's written or completely verbal? >> well, what i do know that after a department issues a permit there is a preconstruction site between our inspector and the contract or who is planning on doing

this work. given that i'm not in charge of the inspection staff, i don't know what discussion may or may not have happened out in the field. it could very well be at the site conditions that the inspector did notice that there were rock slides in the area and how you plan on building this and it doesn't look that safe. that could very well be the line of discussion that triggered at&t to do further evaluation. i couldn't speak to that in this case. >> thank you. >> commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> personally would like to see more information and potentially continue the kaechlts it was stated by the permit holder that on advice from the city and county department that it was an unsafe location for the box and so i would like the

department to look into that and to substantiate their claim if that was information given to them. so, commissioners? >> i would support that. >> what's interesting is that the last couple of marathons on these cases was related to not going through this second round of notice. here there has been multiple rounds of notice. you know since i'm looking at this from my living room, i must have been the third round with the notification. you are looking if you got into first round you can make your complaint and then they are going to move somewhere else. nobody wants to. so i'm not sure what a continuance would do. >> lieblgd -- i would like

to hear since the first location was permitted and from a what i heard from the permit holder that they have not withdrawn that permit, they have not acted on it and have not withdrawn it and they have an active permit for the first location. >> and there is objections at all locations. >> well, i will take a shot at it. i will grant the appeal >> a continuance to get more information with regards to information given by the permit holder. >> can you be more specific commissioner, you want to continue the appeals. who do you want to provide the information, the permit holder or the department? >> actually either or, both the possible because the permit holder has indicated

the engineers indicated it was an unsafe environment and the department told them it was an unsafe environment for the location. >> okay. so, to what date would you propose continuing this? since commissioner hwang is here now, we should do it while she's still with us. >> there is no telling how long that will be. >> july 2nd? commissioner honda is that acceptable to you? >> yes. it works. >> what do you want briefing or exhibits? >> i think exhibits will be fine indicating