specifically a third fast-food restaurant in the center but it was only to be used as a bakery. >> and why does chipolte fit into the use as a fast-food restaurant such as pizza hut did? is it the difference in the type of food? what other types of restaurants can go in? >> it is narrowly drawn and that only applies to the large fast food. the restaurant they were referring to may not have been a large fast food. only this par

space. >> ok.

>> i would certainly think that miss jones as representatives of lakeshore plaza has listened well to the comments of the various neighborhood organizations and i and here stand them. in defense of the plaza or in defense of business in general, might i say in 21 years the concept of individual restaurants verses fast food has greatly changed. all individual russia wants in -- restaurants in areas that are not heavily trafficked have a very difficult time to survive. this is a fast-food restaurant which is not a derogatory term, by the way. those of the ones that survive

in these locations. also in 1989, the process by which this4hñ department and commission processes formula retail has drastically changed. anything that would go in there or anywhere else obviously would come under the formula retail situation. if mcdonald's wanted to go win and hamburgers were allowed, this would still come under a formula retail. -- if mcdonald's wanted to go in. was the oak ridge done to the various listed known neighborhood organizations?

-- was the old reached down with the various listed known organizations? >> i am happy to pass forward the package that includes the 990 mailing labels that went out for the pre application meeting that was held on april 28th. >> that did go out to the registered addresses of the neighborhood organizations? >> yes. >> aside from the form of a retail, what other uses would we have in this shopping center if

we eliminated condition 30? >> this is for a large fast-food restaurant and retail use. if it was to try to enter the plaza, that would require a conditional use authorization as well as the small cell service use restaurants. >> previously when he tried to tell me that a hamburger was a sandwich, it almost worked. i don't think it quite worked but in any case, this triggered my memory a little bit because that kind of argument revolve around what the original intent

of what that section was and the neighbors definitely had a hand in crafting that language. unfortunately, i think as the staff has pointed out, back then there was not the kind of mechanisms that we would have with forma retail that are in place. this was the best way the board of supervisors could come up with to try to upgrade the proliferation of fast food in the shopping center. i like it because it gives the commission some kind of violence. i hate to see this. i don't have an objection to the restaurant, by the way.

a question to the management, you said you have been marketing this space, etc. >> we send e-mail out to the communities every three weeks for lakeshore plaza. we also have leasing signs in the window and the project which generates quite a bit of cold calls. in this space particular, we were targeting ice cream, doughnuts, candy and nuts, and really pizza. >> are those targeted mainly to forma retail? >> no, i am a san francisco city dweller. >> you did not get a hit from

ike's? >> actually they expressed interest until they ran into their own problems. >> the question about all, does this restaurant have alcohol? >> that is debatable at this point. >> we can sell beer. something like half of a percent of our total sales goes to this. >> as was pointed out by commissioners to dianne, we have

a different process which i think is a protection that we did not have when this first came through. certainly if there was a future fast-food certainly in this category, it would go through this commission. that is a protection against the fear that we would get a mcdonald's or another tampa fast-food that the neighborhood did not want. this seems overly restrictive. i am in agreement that part of this should remain and there are two ways that this can be done. one way is that we would add to the types of uses i guess you could call this a mexican restaurant and this would allow this to be approved. we would have to ask mr. washington what the possibilities are. the other way we can do this is to change parts of condition 36 which eliminates the specifications of it having to

be pizza parlor, store, a delicatessen, a bakery, sandwich, bar-b-q, candy or nuts. in 1992, motion 11543 added large fast-food but unspecified that it had to be a bakery. that remains as far as i know. perhaps if this specification of the fight -- type of food is unlimited, this could be a type of ethnic restaurant. >> instead of trying to list all

the possible uses that could be going into this place, if you are ok with them coming back to amend this previous motion, whenever they come in, they can add whatever they're proposing to whatever is appropriate. >> that might be the simplest. you just add this type. apparently they have done this in the past, restricted the type of food you can have. >> as michael has pointed out, the large restaurant have to come in for this anyway. when they come in, if he so chose, you could add that type of food.

war, you could simply remove that restriction for this particular restaurant. >> don't interpret a brio as a folded sandwich? -- do not we interpret the burrito as a full the sandwich? >> the formula retail, this whole thing was invented. that is why our original recommendation was to remove that restriction. maybe the best thing is to remove the restriction for this particular space. >> we can do that on the conditions of approval. >> there are unique restrictions on each of these spaces. you can add whatever you want in the future.

>> that is what i hope to do. >> let me try to make a motion to see if this makes sense. did you want to give your opinion? >> actually, if it pleases the commission, we would prefer some flexibility of mexican food was added to the list for all three. we don't know what will happen. what happens if are being goes away next year? we will be back in the same situation. >> the other thing i believe, the resolution that is from the past as specified that one of the three have to be a bakery. >> i agree with the idea of flexibility. i would like to see the other types of ethnic restaurants

there. you can have an olive garden, all of these types of things. i really don't see the difference between the two. maybe they have to come individually. maybe we can craft something and this would be to approve a conditional use and modify condition 36 for this particular approval to allow a mexican restaurant. >> this would allow mexican food as a permitted use. >> may be the better way to make

this motion would make it subject to all of the provisions in force including all provision 36 except the condition that specifies that it would be one of the following types of food. it could be any type of food. >> as long as we don't lose 36 altogether. for me, it is still important to understand the intent of the original cu end of this stands out as an example of what the neighbors and everyone fought for. >> the motion is for approval,

is this to allow the food prices. >> at this location only. >> is there any concern about all consumption. -- alcohol consumption. >> ok, on the motion. the motion for approval with the modifications to allow other food types for this location only. >> do just to meet with the second large fast-food restaurant? >> i would second that. >> ok, on the motion, commissioner anthony --

>> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> the motion passes.