ignition away from the batteries. also are operating instructions , from another manufacturer of backup batteries. these contain similar safety warnings that continued does continue safety warnings. this is not the type of equipment that we desire in our neighborhood. please vote to deny the permit for this location this week. thank you. good afternoon, supervisors. i would like to talk briefly about one fundamental fact about all telephone networks during times of natural disasters and others emergencies. let me give a simple example. if everyone in san francisco with a traditional landline phone picked up the receiver at the same time to make a call, the network would be overloaded and there would not be enough dialtone to get around. that is the simple fact about any type of network. tele-communications engineers are well aware of this fact and have an number of tools at their disposal to deal with situations like this. for example, with this type of behavior to play tak
wireless facilities like bryson typically include the use of backup batteries to provide power to the facility in the event of power failure. these types of batteries present safety hazards that make the facilities undesirable and in controllable with a hospital setting. including in your packet is the data sheet for the kind of batteries used at these sites in san francisco. fire and explosion hazard data. unusual fire hazards. hydrogen and oxygen gases are produced during normal battery operation. this supports combustion. these gases into the air through the vent. to avoid a chance of fire or explosion, keep sources of ignition away from the batteries. also are operating instructions , from another manufacturer of backup batteries. these contain similar safety warnings that continued does continue safety warnings. this is not the type of equipment that we desire in our neighborhood. please vote to deny the permit for this location this week. thank you. good afternoon, su
this took place in the building that hosted a number of teen mobile antennas in the basement and the roof. for the resulting investigation is not yet in. they were determined to play a role in the fire and we would not even know it. the fire department does not reflect the fact this is the san francisco fire department and the situation list from january, 2009 to december 31st. as you can see thank you very much. next speaker. good afternoon, supervisors. under federal law, verizon is required to prove that the location is the least intrusive means for addressing a significant staff have to of the application before the planning commission contained no discussion of alternative locations that verizon had located and why for these locations one-off viable. in its submission to the board, verizon presents six alternative locations with exclamations, why these buildings are not had a lot defeasible. however, they do not mention the alternative of using the already existing
good afternoon. my name is family emily lee. we do not have the time and resources to keep putting this off. large companies like verizon have more expertise with this and should have been more responsible when they applied for this permit. please vote for verizon based on the merits of what we have argued today. thank you. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. my name is matthew yang. i oppose the installation. this is not the case of not in my backyard the health effect caused by rf emission. it is about verizon s failure to prove this is compatible with the neighborhood. on the surface, it appears to have met the requirements of the planning code. on closer inspection, the information is speculative. they use terms such as good, marginal, and bad, rather than actual data to prove a problem with coverage exists. as our field test has been shown a, the area has good coverage, so where is the need? exhibit a shows most of the blocked calls occur around the existing