pet supplies on geary street. i was before you last year with the pet food express issue and the result of that has been pretty profound on my business, at least. they've was in march and we are now looking at a 15% to 20% decrease in sales and we are actually looking at layoffs at this point with a couple of people that we do have. that's been the ramification of pet food express which was o.k.'d last year. as i said back then, we have to be very careful of the slippery slope that that particular permit allowed. petco and other large chain stores were looking at that process and i predicted that in a few months' time there was going to be something else coming down the pike and obviously petco came in several

months later. improper caring of animals and also for overpricing their

products and is right here. it is the kind of a mentality which do not want in the neighborhood. we are going to be -- there are four stores in the area now. if pepcpetco becomes a viable option, four stores will be pinched between the chain and petco, a one thousands chain around the country. we will be pinched in between this gigantic entities. there's no way we can compete in the locker with that kind of buying power and the kind of pricing and availability should they want to undercut any of our pricing and wait this out until we go out of business and up the pricing and leave the community hostage to whatever pricing the want to said. it has been also proven -- thank

you. >> good evening, commissioners. thank you for your time. i am with the animal connection on chestnut street. i have been up here many times. i wanted to say once again, we are at this crossroad. not to dwell on pet food express. to give you an idea. the business on chestnut street that we have greatly effected. we're down 15% since pet food express opened in march. that is a little. petco is not going to affect us. it will somewhat but it will not affect us as much as deptford

express has. i am here in support of the legislation because i am feeling that i do not know what road we can go down. we have to protect small business. i am here to support john and his business. if anybody saw the paper this morning with netflix and this is off the beaten path, i realize, but it is not. when we look at all the video stores, mom-and-pop that went away because blockbuster moved in and now blockbuster is gone and we have all these different open spots, but netflix took stover. -- took over. the wind up on their price 60% so everyone is up in arms but it is the way things are moving. and personally, i would like to have some type of security as a

san franciscan. thank you for time. >> president olague: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. i live in that neighborhood and i do not shop at cal's, i go to petco. the reality is that this is about petco. there is a block from 14th to 25th. we do not have a pet store. these other stores are 1 mile or a mile and a half away. that is not walking distance. it cannot carry a 25 pound bag of cat litter for mild. the stores will be just fine. i have content -- compared the prices. petco is more expensive and the small stores are expensive. the selection is better.

i can go in and get what i need. i cannot get into the small stores and do that and many of them carry small sizes which are more expensive. you were talking about the elitism. elitism is i should spend more at a smaller business. lower income people do not have that choice to make. so i urge you to oppose the formula retail ban. let's be honest and be honestalk about petco . this is like taking a sledgehammer to a flea. as far as the unique character of the neighborhood, we have chain stores and small businesses. this is not a wealthy area. it really is a fallacy to say this is what makes our community level.

we do all our karins on foot. we're one of the 42% who do not have a car. we have to find a friend who has a car when we get pet supplies and when i do get a car, i cannot just go up the street and hope they have any. i have one shot to get to a store and get whatever is on the list. we're going to petco on ocean ave. i can get what i need. i respect the stores, they are great people, they are nice little stores and i am not a huge fan of chain stores. this is the only thing missing in our neighborhood. we have every other kind of business there. we do not have a pet store. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> the heart of the question is,

where do we want to take our city to end at what level and how do we want to interpret it? i am peter weaver and i own a business and i am here to support the legislation prohibiting formula retail in the geary district. it will take the tax dollars out of the city and have an impact on the existing independent stores and prevent future entrepreneurs to enter the market. that is a key thing. we have these retail stores coming in and it will prevent other entrepreneurs like myself, it will be a turnoff. for this reason this is a problem and san francisco is known for its various vibrant and unique neighborhoods. people come here to enjoy the shop and its ambiance.

following formula retail chain stores will curtail this fabric. -- will unfurl this fabric. we're looking at other cities. this is not good for our city. i asked the commission to support the legislation. thank you. >> president olague: thank you. >> thank you for your time. fourth generation san franciscan and i own two locations in san francisco and i have a kitchen where we process our cat food and dog food. i employ about 13 employees, all living in san francisco. part of the charm of san francisco is small business. the reason why i opened the

small business is because of the charm and the fact that i love this city. of it -- these big box stores coming in is going to in the long run markell's. i am in support of the legislation. thank you. >> i would like to remind anyone to turn off mobile devices that may sound off during the procedures. >> thank you. i also work for jeffrey's natural pet foods. i moved in 2007 and am happy to have a reason to stay. i was able to walk in to my local pet food store looking for exactly what it is i need. what they carry and other special items i may need them to order. other things i might want them

to consider stocking. i was able to find work within the next few weeks at the store and i have been able to earn a living wage since then. i appreciate that opportunity. the small pet stores are receptive to their clients. we know dogs by name and we know clients by name, we know favorite foods, we know inclinations, we know allergies, we know so much about the people who we serve and we're able to do the things they need to serve their animals better and to cover all their needs. even as far as things like walking distance between stores, a lot of the small stores can offer delivery and do. large formula retail tends to attract customers who have vehicles and it is not necessarily increasing foot traffic in any way. although it would to some extent. there is consideration but the major issue that we're facing is

we do need some kind of alternative to consider a formula retail as far as what it is going to exclude in the future. that includes pharmacies, coffee shops, all these things are being challenged by some kind of big bucks retail. the conditional use permit is effective in some ways but we do not want to keep saying our own businesses hurt in this way. even if it were in a different neighborhood. i am in support of the legislation. i hope that you will also support the planning -- findings of the small business commission as well. >> president olague: is there additional public comment? >> i am a resident of the richmond district and a longtime

san franciscan. i was not prepared to speak but i felt moved. i realized the thing i would like to address is the fact that house special san francisco is. i manage a pet boutique in pacific heights and every day tourists marvel at our city because it is a special city and i look at places like the richmond district. i am checking out different neighborhoods kamal these special partisan ice-cream places. i look at the richmond district and think i love this area. i think what is missing? we have an opportunity with these open storefronts to bring it back home. if you looke at buston's, park life is a gallery space. it is world class our work.

we have the opportunity to cultivate the richmond district. opening it up to small business owners and to make it special. why do people come to the city? they do not come to the city so they can see petco. why can't we just open it up to small business owners, people who have great ideas but maybe not a lot of money. why is it about money and how much the landlord could get? corporations can absorb the loss. it is fragile right now and i would like to see a quality of business go into our neighborhoods and empty shop fronts. >> president olague: thank you. public comment is closed. commissioner miguel? >> commissioner miguel: i

appreciate the comments. i pointed out to many people who come in to our city, to our airport that the policy at the airport is to have small businesses that are based in san francisco. you do not have mcdonald's and burger king out there trying to sell you food. you have branches of a local restaurant. this by the way, everything i have been able to find out is unique in the world. some of them will have one or two. none of them have a policy such as we have. san francisco is a city of very distinct neighborhoods. i mentioned before client talking to supervisors that i did not think this was the best use of land planning. i have not moved from the

opposition. but i have seen situations where large formula retail big box, however you want to term it have moved in two neighborhoods -- into neighborhoods, have pricing and because of their ability to advertise in a massive amount, been able to garner a great deal of business, impoverished small businesses, and then when those small businesses are no longer competition, because many of these big firms think in terms not of two years and five years, but of 10 and 20 years, there will literally take over. and i do not want to see that happen.

-- and they will literally take over. i do not want to see that happen. with our method of handling land use -- it does work and i have full confidence in it. i do understand the present position and although reluctantly, i would tend to support. >> president olague: commissioner antonini? >> commissioner antonini: this is not necessarily about petco, we are about of peace -- a piece of legislation. i agree. there are a couple of things, you mentioned something about the restaurant part of this which -- something about

amendments to the general plan because we're at too high a level already if we were allowing to go by cu. >> the recommendation before you is meant to say that if the commission feels that 30% threshold as put forward by the supervisor, if you feel that threshold is correct, we should look at amending the general plan. the threshold prefers to a 20% in 25. at 20% you should take a hard look at proposals because there might be an overconcentration issue and that 25% and greater, we should not permit those uses. the proposal from the department is to not use those -- the 30% threshold and the supervisor described that he is amenable to making modifications to remove that threshold. and it is the general plan -- if

you wanted to explore that issue, staff would be happy to look into it. >> vice president miguel: we can incorporate the positions as well as the geary fast food which would apply to that end we would be receptive to your suggestions on permitting video stores if there are any that exist. they could come in there. that is fine. i would actually be in favor of removing the probation on formula retail pet food. that allows for the conditional use process to continue. i would make a motion to do the following things. staff recommendation would be fine. that is a motion. >> president olague: commissioner sugaya?

>> your motion is to approve in the order presented, one and three? >> vice president miguel: no. 4 has to be removed. three, yes. we have modified number one to make these additional eating and drinking establishments with the exception of the one additional store that will be allowed aon clement. >> there is one other item and the supervisor indicated he is amenable to making that modification. the way that the ordinance is drafted, it would capture any

establishment which sold any pet supplies. we would recommend that -- that is right. >> vice president miguel: we're removing the prohibition on fast food. removing the formula retail prohibition and instead allowing it to continue to be decided by conditional use which is the case. however, if it were to occur, if for some reason the board of supervisors did include that, we would have to make a modification that would exempt stores like safeway or somebody who has -- it has to be principal use pet food supplies as opposed to part of their stores. that is a contingency part of the motion. >> i am curious to see what the other commissioners -- >> there is the basic philosophy

underlying supervisor mar's legislation. the challenges posed by the department are real. i believe there are too many disconnected pieces at this hour and i would like to have further discussion on this and to be fair to all parties, there is a lot of work in there. this is coming with too many uncertainties for me. i will ask that we continue. >> president olague: is there a second? there is no second. commissioner sugaya? >> commissioner sugaya: could you give me a quick run down on

the other neighborhood commercial, other parts of the city where we have prohibition on certain formula retail uses and what they are? >> on page 4 of the case report, we go over the current status of the retail controls in the city. the first controls established in 2004 applied to the haight and that was a prohibition on formula retail uses. there have been a number of other changes with conditional use authorization and the district's, this does not make that distinction between the ones that are probation. this lists the districts that have formula retail controls but does not make the distinction between the prohibition and conditional use authorization. i believe there are only a couple. >> i believe they would be north

beach and hayes. >> what about japan town sud? >> are those generic in terms of all formulas? >> the most recent ordinance was one that you heard in the fillmore district. that was just for formula retail restaurants. and that prohibited formula retail restaurant. -- restaurants. president olague: i am inclined to support staff for condition although i respect the work of supervisor mar. i respect the work you have done over the years on everything. this discussion needs to be broader and part of my concern

is that it is too singular in its focus and i think it is a policy discussion i would like to see. it is a little bit circular logially. [no audio] walgreens sells food now and i think of some of the smaller businesses on clement that sell, mom and pops, i wonder how they would be affected negatively by the [no audio].

if we're going to consider these types of probations, let's look at the picture. we have had a lot of discussions --it also takes disy from the planning commission. it was -- sometimes to get approved and sometimes they do

not. we have to keep that process intact. >> president olague: commissioner sugaya? >> commissioner sugaya: i get the sense the commission would like to have something that addresses -- i do not know if i am saying this right. additional prohibitions on formula retail in this area but not knowing what the sentiment of the community is, we are not really sort of prepared to say all formula retail like on the fillmore, whether we should include restaurants or the kind of thing. are we up against a 90 day kind of thing? >> commissioner moore had a

motion. >> i do not know if i am ready to hold this up to have the larger policy discussion either. i think the supervisor realizes the direction we're trying to head in and will probably then take a look at possibly other considerations along this line. >> i will check in with the city attorney. if we can create subcommittees' of the commission, commissioner moore has raised this issue. this could probably work in to have that kind of conversation with the small business commission. i will work with the city attorney on that. >> commissioner moore: the

reason i ask for continuance is to not find the perfect answer but since we all stepped into this thing today with a lot of confusion of what was at the core of this. each of us in our own reading asked how does it fit together? it is in the -- staff has prepared a great answer. i have a hard time tracking. i do not have it in front of me. i believe genuinely in their good work and ability to pull it together but i wanted to give myself more time to reflect on it. i do want to make the right decision try it that is where i am coming from. real simple. no hidden motive here in terms of stalling. will stepped in -- we all stepped in saying what are we reading here?