time. i think that this building, there needs to be some use their obviously. this is an eyesore that has been sitting there for a while but i think it is unfortunate in a way that there is not more that we could do with these underutilized space is at this time. i am hoping that we have a conversation where we can start to look at the different types of uses for these sites that are vacant. >> i would like to ask the project sponsor or the staff, who is the developer of the property? >> this is landmark and they are exclusively available for cvs.

>> i don't know what the continuances for. working with staff to do what? do you want to add another story or two? what is it, if i could get some clarification -- >> the one thing i would be asking, if what is the city's position on this land becoming a parking lot? corks this is public property.

this is currently needed for parking and once the curved cuts exist, i suppose that the department of public works could leavehis and not to anything. the sponsor intends to work to have meters put in those locations to extend the existing parking. the full intent is that it would be used as on street parking. >> could you please address that this parking will continue to be public parking but not specifically designated.

>> the parking as created would not exist as it is now and this would be more of the same parking that is a long this very unique strip. here is the strip of existing properties and here were the gas station that is being converted. i don't see any way to pull this building out. this is a public sidewalk, this is a public right away that turns into a parking strip. this is a pretty unusual situation. we would have wished it was built the other way. it will probably never be built that way. if you go down the street, the next larger block is the one with the diagonal parking.

there's a tiny block at the end. that is the way the streets are built. i cannot imagine the process that we would have to go through to eliminate that and change every one of these properties forward. i don't think that there is any question that if the staff at the direction of the commission would like to work on this building, that's fine. i think that we are doing a fantastic job in creating a corner where a garage and a filling station used to exist. >> this might not be the right

time to change it. i wish we could take a larger look at this entire thing because there are fantastic opportunities for the retailer as well as people who need to park. the size of asphalt in this particular part of the street, this will be on a narrow right of way. there is a bad precedent of too much asphalt and the dated looking buildings. >> there are people who would do this differently today but there are legal possibilities. part of the problem is the height of the building. this is only 26 feet.

>> i don't remember the history about how this parking area came to be but i was told that the drive was widened and that could have been part of it. you'll notice that parts of the remnants still remain and they made it into two lanes each way rather than a single lane to connect to market street and make it more convenient to get from the west side to the east side. even though there is another pharmacy close by, it is healthy to have competition. it has been quite beneficial that cvs has gone into the

vacant site. this could have been a grocery that might have gone in there are probably the cost would have been too 0 prohibitive for them to go into that. hopefully the small businesses will be more creative and marketing to be more competitive and to redesign their buildings a little bit and their merchandise. many times it is what the small businesses are offering over the chains. if they are creative, sometimes they will attract business. the second floor issue, i would like to see that. i and stand the constrictions here. this is probably not as good a place to think about in the future.

if those banks in parking lots are redone and i think it is very a corporate to go up one or two floors as long as you keep the same amount of parking. those are better places to try to build a street front of is a little bit taller. >> this is an extremely badly designed to strip mall. i cannot call it anything else. for all of these retail uses are in one section of what happens with forma retail, all of these

uses will affect what it was set up to protect. that is what causes a lot of my problems. we cannot look at it as directly affecting the funds. we will probably not have any standalone prescription filling. the other uses that are within this type of vacancies are small business uses and that is what we will have to take a look at and protect against. one of the reasons i seconded the motion that i was looking at the building.

this is a very simple solutions and references to the department. we might be talking about an entirely different piece of architecture and that might be better to come back at another time. >> i would like to ask the department if you feel comfortable if the commission revises a motion and tenets of lee approves the motion. perhaps you could show it to us. we could continue the project

many of these will take on the toning down of this particular design and we would support that. >> corks are you comfortable with that? >> i want to mentioned that we had the opportunity to revise the motion and we added a condition of approval directly approving the desire to continue to work with the sponsor and we recognize the prominence of this and i hear that you're asking for a bit more. we will take that to heart.

>> we have a small hearing with the business commission. we can have the impact of formula retail on small businesses because as was mentioned, i believe there is a lot of the goods and merchandise that is sold along areas like motion are similar and sometimes small businesses don't have the capital to keep up with the marketing programs that larger corporations have. they cannot compete with corporate marketing plans.

competition is good but i am not convinced that san francisco needs 8 pharmacies within a three block radius. i don't know how we look at that, i don't know how we address that but this is something to consider. >> i am ok with this motion. i want to make sure that of staff has made some significant changes, i know they will do a good job but i want to make sure that we don't come up with a modern looking building that is not flat -- fit in with the

basic context. at least if we can stay with this time as the project sponsors are trying to do, i think that really fits in well with tower market which is really the dominant architectural figure of the mall there. i would hope that is the case. it is not like there is a building across the street which you might be familiar with. that is right in that little triangle. this is probably about 20 years old. this is architecturally pretty bad, i think. we have to be really careful. >> i would best described the architecture of being a background building.

it can be a contemporary and not modern. background building this circumstance of being a building that served the purpose it is used for and is not try to be more. unfortunately, the imitation architecture is difficult to pull off in the first place and this is complicated and not what we do in today's architecture anymore. this is a new building. with respect to the architect who does come from southern california, i think that he is easy to rise indication of what i call the background building.

>> we are getting on the big topics starting with small things. i don't want to try to reinvent the wheel. part of that was multiple stores, we had these coffee stores on many blocks. this map is fascinating. you can see what is around there. i am a very strong believer in market driven economics and let the market control what survives and what does not survive.

some of these have not been in use. we had this discussion about thinking about radius and thinking about for later in the same way that google does. >> that would be interesting. >> i don't know that everything we build today has to be contemporary. i think that we can build with using things that have been built over the centuries that are in context with the buildings they are near. buildings that have been torn down that have been built may be in the 40's and 50's. what they did is take their cues from the earlier building, whether this is masonry, other

types. buildings that fit in very nicely with the older buildings. they fit in extremely well and i think that is important that that is kept in mind and that we don't do everything the same which was a mistake in the past. >> it might be useful to pull that report. you look at chestnut street or poultry, there are four coffeeshops. the need to look at what has worked in various commercial strips to figure it out the saturation point.

there are a couple of restaurants that are kind of local but this is mostly forma retail. the shopping center concept rain troop and the types of uses in the strip. this is not releasing successful for small businesses which is one of the reasons why i feel ok with it rather than at this site. >> i think that our market is fairly simple. this is trying to take art deco and put it into one building. for me, this does not work. a little simplification i don't mind references to art deco. this is a block away. the rest of the shopping

centers are fairly clean. something would help, i'm not speaking against good design. a little simplification might be in order. >> the entire neighborhood or that part of the park that is back two or three streets is pretty much mission revival. there are a couple buildings back at the far end that have that. that is another possibility. whenever you come up with, i am sure it will look great. >> there is a motion on the floor for approval with instructions that the project sponsors should continue working with staff. at the beginning of the presentation, on the motion. >> aye.

>> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> commissioners, you are now on item number 11, case number 2,010.1118dd. this is for 952 mission street. >> this request is amendatory discretionary veto filed by a neighboring property owner to develop a medical cannabis dispensary at 952 mission street. this complies with all planning

code criteria and the site will be a second location for grass- roots cannabis. the project is subject to a discretionary review required by the developer of a proposed hotel. the dr requester could negatively impact the ability of this project to obtain financing. he considers the medical cannabis dispensary to be incompatible. the location has contributed positively through increased security, sidewalk cleaning, charitable projects, and participation. the department has received 452 letters of support.

the department has received four letters and opposition. one of the objectors is now in support of the project. this is someone who had a business in the plaza and they have been in conversations with the sponsor. they appreciate the planned that the sponsor has for increased security and general improvement and the cleanup of that area. in general, the supporters consider the use desirable. this has had a positive impact on another neighborhood. the opposition is concerned about the impact of the use in the location.

this is an area where the department and the city have been working to try to generally enhance the business environment. the project is located and one of the few areas of the city where a medical cannabis dispensary can locate. there are very few schools and community centers. concerns have been expressed about the potential over concentration of these medical cannabis dispensaries in the area, there is only one facility within one-quarter miles of the project site. there had been a facility across the street without one has closed. the department recommends that the department take discretionary review and approve the project with conditions. this complies with all the standards and requirements of the planning code.

grassroots has run a successful medical cannabis dispensary. i will be happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> thank you. projects sponsor. >> there was a discretionary review filed. >> could afternoon, commissioners. i am the owner. -- good afternoon, commission

express the opposition to the group of the medical dispensary proposal because it will have a negative effect on the approved hotel projects and the total revitalization of the area. we ask you take the d.r. and disapprove the proposal. since december until now we have been working hard to get this project not into construction. we have spent in excess of a million dollars getting our environmental review done and going to the construction drawings and coming before the planning commission to do whatever is necessary. in parallel, we have been working with several financing companies trying to do the project financed and during that term and between then and now, we have several good prospects

who are now willing to finance the project. our concern is that locating the cannabis dispensary next to that would probably jeopardize or even derail the project. we think that once our financing partners come to know about the project, they will probably look at it very disfavorably and so this will definitely have the liability of the project. and secondly we are working with a couple of individual companies to operate hotel which will be a mid market family oriented in the conventional hotel. and we also feel that once they learn about it they will look at this project very disfavorably. so all i want to say is once the hotel is approved and constructed, we will have very positive effect on the 5600

block of mission and it will help revitalize the area and also bring a lot of construction and permanent jobs to the area and will threaten our project as well as revitalization of the area. and i wanted to have my associate here say a few more things. >> my name is christopher and i am an associate of the developers and speaking not in opposition to the concept of a medical cannabis dispensary per se but rather i want to raise two concerns. one is specific and one is procedural. concerning the specific action before you, i urge the commission to require a more thorough investigation with the possibility that certain facilities are within operation of 1,000 feet and the immediate south market area is a rich organization of community

organizations and it is our understanding that the filipino youth program is active nearby and we believe it is important for the commission to require a full investigation of all youth serving the programs before approving this location. the primary reason the developer is specified is our concern about the process. san francisco rightly limits the numbers of projects that can be in a neighborhood and we have to go through a conditional use before being allowed to proceed with our hotel and national chain retailers are prohibited from any neighborhoods such as the mission. and a number of us want fast foods in several portions of the city such as north beach. there are strict guidelines governing the appropriate location of a number of other activities. however, there are no limitations to the number of m.c.d.'s that can be located in