located within the 300-foot radius i am asking the city to overturn the decision on the premise of like-foods. the mobile foods facility is not supposed to compete with existing restaurants, but that is exactly what is happening with the k industries and others being put in close proximity. the foot traffic we so desperately need for rent. placing the food trucks and un- finalized areas, there are 32 quick-service restaurants in the one-block radius.

and the beautiful ferry building. the city did a great job. it is a great place to get quick food. i have approximately 600 square feet with the majority go into a full-service kitchen and a city in mandated bathroom. with 200 square feet of street frontage, i have no room for receding. i am protesting the industry's food truck because it will have a negative impact on my restaurant kitchen and opened 12 years ago. we are a healthy, quick service restaurants. my menu consists of the to-go vegetarian selections and many meat and vegetable plates. it is important of that

mediterranean and indian food use many of the same spices and share the same flavor profiles. while many of the foods have different things, the components are the same. they plan to sell chicken wraps, like our rolls. their veggie plate looks like our mediterranean play. -- plate. >> so nervous. other way?

still? as you can see, these are wraps. what they have chosen to sell

will directly target my customer base. it is like food verses like food. if we are to follow the guidelines of the city ordinance, in states that lie cushaw take into consideration the ethnicity of the food and composition of each menu as well as other issues that the officer deems appropriate to determine whether conflict of food aid exists. i will skip over the coffee cart. it could adversely -- that is where the industry in fringes of my concept. the truck is going to serve the same kind of vegetarian plates has oasis. they are indeed like food, so i urge the hon. members of the board to revoke the permit. it would be a hard few years to

-- it has been a hard few years for everyone. food truck advocates have been leaving out the important facts. the high-rises are double. they can hold a double the capacity of the high-rises, there are way more people there. another important fact is that york city is the city that never sleeps. it can be a ghost town after 9:00. they have the nightlife there that we just don't have. many quick service restaurants closed between 4:00 and 5:00 p.m. ahead it is important to realize that the san francisco financial district has limited hours and days of business.

the productive hours are monday through friday, 10:00 to 2:00. these are the hours the food trucks have chosen to operate. there is not a chance to make up lost business or revenue. it can mean closure. i hope that you will revoke their permit. >> we can hear for appellants for a 11-111. nihois somebody here for that appeal? >> i am with skyline construction, the vice- president. we have about 80 people in the

office, and we also served as a great deal of the high-rise buildings downtown. coming up, we will have -- i pay a hundred and $25 per permit. even though i have paid a hundred and $25 for a permit, -- i have paid $825 for a permit. it is one hour in front of the building. ask you, if you're going to let them hard for an hour and this truck parts for five hours, i have three jobs going on in the building at one time.

i have 15 sub-contractors per job and i could have the 45 potential sub-contractors there on top of the fact that there is the center. we have a high density area in a big problem potentially coming out of this area. davis street is the only street thief and get through to south of market right now. will it is because in a huge potential problem for pedestrians. there will be a potential problem for double-parked vehicles. there'll be a problem from by companies to make a buck if we have trucks prohibiting us from doing our work. we charge a lot of money to do the work and because we pay high wages. time is money.

and if you're going to allow these trucks to infringe upon the highest density area in the western united states, i think you're making a big mistake. it doesn't make any sense. i grew up in the city, i have lived here all my life. san francisco should take pride on the decisions like building a ballpark. allowing trucks to put other people here tonight and out of business is not a good idea for this place. putting jobs in jeopardy, as a result of an attempt for us to get a small amount of revenue, which is not worth it. it will cause big problems down the line here. that you have a truck parked, it is backwards.

it is just another reason, it is crazy. i object strongly to the idea that you allow these kinds of trucks. based on the fact that they will not be able to perform their jobs. you put some ridiculous impediment in their way. i think you very much for your time. >> we can hear from the last appellant for appeal 11-112. >> me and my family have on the and operated in mexican restaurant for 23 years. and then clear the long list of the group that has been there. it is and the 300 radius.

i like to talk about the restaurant at the brick and mortar building. i employ 15 people the play -- that i pay health insurance had salary that will increase on january 1. the monthly rent averages $13,000 a month. i would like to show you this article dated november 27, 2011 in which the owner of the tempest bar is quoted in saying that the lunch crowd is doubt about 75%. but when food trucks continued to the point of serious concern, this concerns me. a close family friend with a brick and mortar locations. the business was so good, he was making over $1 million a truck.

he closed it because it was not beneficial to have those open. not only did affect me and my family, but the employees that i consider my family. we have been serving the financial district for a long time. on behalf of my restaurant, family, and customers, i would ask you to direct to the public department of public works to revoke this permits. >> are you ready for us to hear from the permit older? >> i think someone thinks they have an opportunity to speak. >> are you affiliated with the appellant? >> my business partner, i am here to represent number one in

california. >> that time has already been taken. is that correct? >> how he took four minutes. i can give the seventh three minutes. >> your partner already spoke. >> a cut-appellant spoke. but there is time remaining. >> three minutes remaining. that is fine. >> i have a picture right on the quarter -- on the corner. we all feel that the trucks being parked right in front is really going to cut into our business. we're holding our own even with

these economic times, we are selling vietnamese sandwiches were we are at. have been there for 14 years and doing just fine. we are selling pastries, vietnamese and sandwiches, coffee, everything. customers come from vacations all over the world. in a large majority of them come to our shop for the camaraderie and for the whole some sandwiches that we do have. we have taken them and have to leave. we do get a considerable amount of people coming to our shop. having the truck parked right there, selling the exact same item is really going to be rough. i will keep it short. please reconsider giving a

permit to these trucks. thank you. >> with this gentleman, the appellants all have 43 minutes. >> we can hear from the permit older. >> public comment will be when? >> later, you will be hearing from me. i will try not to be repetitive. >> i am starting the clock at how much? >> 14 minutes.

>> you can request more time at that point. >> there are slides that i don't want to show quite yet. a very interesting conversation being had about the economic vitality of the financial district. i want to look at the legislation does passed unanimously, creating this program and how does the board of supervisors unanimously did something, frankly, out of character for san francisco government. they saw where things were going economically in this city, in this world, and they created a very carefully crafted piece of legislation to enhance the economy of san francisco and enhance the restaurant environment.

i will read from the ordinance. this legislation is an effort to officially regulated and encourage the expansion of st. food in san francisco. it is companion legislation to the similar effort subject to the planning dakota. this is the intent of this legislation. you have been hearing from people telling you that this legislation should never have been passed. someone mentioned that they wanted to put a ballot measure on. if the quality of san francisco want to change this legislation, that is the way it has had -- it has got to happen. those expressed today were at the table when the legislation was being considered. it was passed by the board of

supervisors in december 3, 2010. the golden gate restaurant association was in support of this. they were present in the process. the detailed procedures were created for implementation and no issue the permit is permanent. the insurer for smith and revocation should be process not be observed. the board of supervisors were responding to the situation very much as they did in other aspects of regulation, that the police department could not well handled. there was article 17.2 at 17.3. the procedures for notification and for application for mobile food vendors and peddlers. i heard this term several times

in discussing this with people. it was willy-nilly. it was willy-nilly enforcement. that wasn't a good way to go about a food truck program in san francisco and the ordinance was created and passed by 11 members of the board of supervisors. there is a proven an effective permit infrastructure. i've believe that given the opportunity to try, this program can effectively meet the goals of the legislation. there is demand in the community. i hadn't eaten at food trucks until recently. my son has been telling me that the best in san for it is is available at a food truck and i was impressed.

i tried to have a conversation with him about this industry, food trucks versus the restaurants. he used the term that i did not understand. he said that mobil food is web 3.0. it is a different kind of industry that we are accustomed to and it is serving a different community that the financial district has traditionally been accustomed to. it isn't between my client and the subway or my client and the oasis. it is between san francisco and amsterdam. it is between san francisco and portland, seattle, london, and every place else in the san francisco is trying to attract and hold. one of the things that we offer is a vital culture that is hard

to find in many other places in this country and in this world. there is a cultural evolution going on, the web three. joe really means. we are not really talking about competition between the food trucks and these other locations. domino's might be a good analogy. they are small and sending their food out. they are taking a quick trip out. they are doing something fundamentally different than you or i do when we have lunch. they are twittering, going on facebook, discussing their experience of yelp and google plus. these are things i don't understand in relation to lunch.

the communication that goes on in this web three. of community is the thing that keeps a san francisco vital in the tech world. it keeps all of these restaurants filled, by having these industries attracted to and constant in san francisco. when the san francisco board of supervisors passed of this legislation, they were thinking about the economic vitality of san francisco. how do we stay competitive in global world and in the global economy? i would like to go to the overhead if i could and show you a couple of pictures. excuse me, to the computer display.

i did some research in the history of mobile foods and found a lot of pictures like this, mobile food vendors in chinatown, pictures were credited by children. this one i found particularly interesting on the 1600 block, the oyster loaf. you can of that script. these are a couple of street food vendors. years later, we see the same on the restaurant. it is the brick and mortar that accrue from this. this is not a new idea, but change is constant in the restaurant world.

right now, 35 at the corner is replaced by, i believe, a 12- story building. that is good, with the overhead we can go back. this legislation was not put in place to support one launcher option over another. it was to create a viable and exciting environment overall. like any ecosystem, a diverse environment is a stable environment. it is a strong environment and an attractive environment. diversity is a good thing here, and it will encourage dining out and restaurants. these trucks are not going to be at these locations every day of

the week. some of the locations are for two days a week or three days a week. the trucks are not there everyday. we have chipotle grill moving in. that is a large chain of restaurants, we are concerned about 7-eleven and the subway. these aren't actually competing with casa. it is a different kind of food and a different kind of experience being offered. the idea that they would be overrun by a day or two a week that these trucks will be there just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. in actuality, they will be enhancing the economic environment overall. there will be many days that people come down the street that don't know that it is not there

that day and they're going to decide for the first time to try the brick and mortar down the block. this legislation encourages the expansion of food in san francisco. that is what this food is tailored to do. i don't think this board wants to go in to the territory of hearing this legislation. did the department of public works effectively apply this legislation? and is the department of public works and setting up an adequate program to monitor it? are they hearing is properly? are the public hearings properly noticed? they came to the department of public works and admitted -- stated directly in opposition

and how many communications they received. all of these issues were considered, and given this program, the fact that these permits to do not go on forever and can be easily revoked or suspended, we have the first programs for you. regarding suspension and revocation of the permits, i will go to the overhead. if it finds after a public hearing that such a permit

holders engaged or have been found guilty of the following x, it lists the good neighbor policy and lists all of the conditions that keeps this as an orderly and clean undertaking. nobody wants this to create a trash problem for a traffic problem. we want a vital downtown. we want to enhance down town, not detract from it. that is why this legislation built these things in. this was clearly developed as an idea. it was developed with what the government should be doing, what is best for the entirety of san francisco. only to look at the audience that is here, and i don't think it will take a big stretch to understand what interests there

are here. this is a young the idea. these people are young people and they are coming in, serving the young economy. serving a growing of the economy. i think it is essentially vital to the continuing economic well- being of our city. it is what they had in mind when the legislation was passed unanimously. i encourage you to hear from him as he describes the process by which they will enforce these permits and the process by which they decide whether to grant these permits or not. what we want to do is serve an economy for the entire city, keeping it all vital. coming to the financial district