coming up during that process there are a lot of things you can't do. so but i don't know anybody is and it might get a lot of push back but i think that in a lot of ways maritime is not that much of a lack active purpose. and i guess the question is does the city family really just want to sit back and accept what's there or there any discussions that are challenging or relig n religioning the whole thing

>> i guess in short perhaps to commissioner moore's suggestion if they want to have a more detailed presentation about the waterfront land it would not be complete without talking about those public trust questions you're raising. in general just like you as a planning commission need to look at how our policies evolve and trond different kinds of legislation. the public trust principles are principle and they evolve over time and we found even though we may not always agree that we have a very open and collaborative relationship that has allowed the state lands commission to look at the

waterfront and urban waterfront with the historic district that's listed on the national raerj and take into account a lot of the land use issues to factor into the trust their determinations. that's how we've been able to achieve the project so far. some of the projects beyond the china channel we have very informative and intelligent and seasoned experience to work through those issues >> if i may follow-up the question that was asked hits the nail on the head. this is a good opportunity to take a look at what the next steps are. my friends at the labor unions

is the reality is the ports are shifting from a maritime port to a real estate port area. i'm happy those two items were fused together. if we're going to have any success we're to have to tie them hand in hand because no one is successful without the other. i have a long history with the areas it's crowded. at one point it wasn't crowded but how we manage success we've got a pilot and we'll see what sticks and what doesn't but my advice so to remain as flexible as we can. this is an intelligent approach

and i think that we're in a new era to collect data to make better decisions and i hope we stay open this path and not get distracted. it would be great to have a little bit of a dream study to show modest changes and it is so ridiculously expensive to do anything on the port we end up for projects to be penciled anti if we're able to lower the construction costs you might not be having some egresses projects coming forward. i'm looking forward to having

this project completed >> to look at the comments. most of you have read the landscape by rubbing benefit it's an interesting history to 2008 and it deals very much with the massive size of the some of the projects that had to be proposed because of all the things that have to be satisfied. i'm supportive of the comments and support of the e line concept. hopefully it can go thereto tunnel and it's an opportunity to draw people out of their cars assuming we can get enough people on the f line. so i think anything we can do to

prompt that i'm very much in favor of >> further questions? >> okay. thank you very much. >> commissioners if there's nothing further we can move into item 13. amendments to the planning code to expand the definition of formula retail. i'd like to provided some clarity there seems to be a number of variances and so to clarify the preliminary recommendation to recommend approval for recommendations and to table it >> you have before you an ordinance introduced by

supervisor breed to expand the proposed project. >> good afternoon. i'm the aid to london breed. let me apologize for the lengthy presentation but unfortunately we're facing a skeptic memo from the planning department. the legislation before you makes two small arising to the controls in the hayes valley. supervisor breed is asking for your support. the merchants association in particular and you'll hear from them they're concerned about the doughnut home.

it allows folks to circumstance vent policies. this legislation one revise the definition to include locations outside of the u.s. and two applies the formula control to the existing formula retailers. we're not relitigating this ban. first, let me discuss why we want to include the international areas. supervisor breed believes this is a international market. especially with the rise of internet commerce retail is truly a global marketplace. and any location - why would it make a difference if a company

has 11 locations in canada or the u.s. those do not change because simply some of the stores are outside of the u.s. a european company has a large organization throughout europe they have 11 stores in the united states. so arrogant has been allowed to circumvent the codes. frankly i don't understand why the chamber of commerce obtain to worldwide locates. why is it fair to regulate american companies but not european one. this should apply fairly.

shouldn't it not be biased against american companies. now let me address the affiliate companies. now since some retailers abide deby some policy like the gap. there's nothing to stop levies from opening a docket store. simply by creating a new name it is not fair to companies. the lack of products don't change because they changed their name a formula retailer is still a formula retailer.

shouldn't it apply fairly to ail formula retailers. it doesn't seek to ban the policy only look at that. some of auditor this ordinance is being recognized without 0 data or analysis. we've had a decade of data and in the analysis of hayes valley community and the district supervisor this ordinance is in the best interest of the community. the arrogant who has multiple locations and a similarly large candy retailer is going to open soon for they regard that as a pressing need and wanted their government to act. there's a ongoing conversation about the city's retail.

supervisor breed has arrested to hold-off on here ordinances until the defendant it complete but this ordinance is not part of this conversation. hayes valley has always been a test case. supervisor mar on it's introduced an ordinance that would make it citywide. there's nothing in this ordinance that would prevent this from happening but this is all a separate conversation. we're seeking a might have had revision. the staff has recommended an approval that would be based on two things first, the department doesn't have the expertise to

control the structure and the land issues are not a factor. with respect to the first point verifying oernz. in the course of the coming weeks at the ordinance moves thereto process the supervisor is happy to help with the implementation for vivifying oernz and i have already had several conversations with deputy district attorney how the planning department can verify the structure. the department could require some evidence from the pleasant such as articles of corporates corporation and there's an existing process for code board

appeals. if a third party shows evidence the department can initiate the process and if the department finds they're in violation they could deny the application. there are a variety of procedural means and the fact that those procedures are not defined means the procedures should be redefined. it already states that if something is a city formula use. the burden is on the formula stores. it should be - of the 10 finding

for section 603 of the planning code 4 deal with the size and structure of the company and one deals with the aesthetics. finding two, that san francisco meditates to protect small businesses and it stays within the local committee without going to local offices and item 6 is for businesses for better capital businesses. and the planning code already focuses on business structure. and since the affiliate of a or a subsidy is better originated

the planning code already defines the codes in the valley. supervisor breed is committed to this legislation. the departments concern of verifying the structure should be reidentified. again supervisor breeds respects the citywide conversation about formula detail. and she believe that hayes valley has already been a test issue. the hayes valley wants the definition made as soon as possible and we respect this wish. it's endorsed by the small business commission and i know it's fair to say it, it's brought to the xhgs so i'm happy

to answer any questions >> opening it up to public comment. i have some speaker cards. sorry >> thank you connor. so as you recall they have the two districts in the city that has a prohibition it will include stashtsd that l have las vegas or more establishments in the world not just within the united states and it will include 50 percent of the stock ownership is owned by a formula retail use or affiliate or an establishment has fewer than 11

establishments throughout of the world. the departments recommendations is that supervisor breed hold off on the ordinance so a more comprehensive package of the retail controls and adopt the resolution to that site. however, if she feels a need to proceed the department recommendation that they formula changes be done citywide and not on an individual basis. and to remove the provision that would tie the formula to neighborhood structure. the first remedies is tied to the recommendation about the formula retail definition last week. we would like to have a more

comprehensive policy. regarding the other modifications and we want to avoid the patchwork of other definitions around the city our code is a very complicated code. there's lots of definitions. we try not to have speculate definitions it makes it difficult to implement. and finally, awhile we understand the definitions to be expand as members of the jury, we don't have the expertise in our department to look at how to implement that and if we can't implement it effectively it's probably not going to work. we're happy to work with the supervisor to find a way to

implement it but not at this time. and then finally the proposed ordinance would add a business ordinance for additional for about for overview and oversight. yeah, the findings in the code talk about the ownership factor but we're concerned about basing the ownership factor as a reason for additional oversight and what that could lead to. we're not rooektd e rejecting this out right of. that concludes my presentation >> opening it up to public comment. i have some speaker cards

(calling names) >> good afternoon. i'm russel's i'm president of the merchant association and on the board of the neighborhood association and also on the council of district merchants. i'm pleased that the planning department wants to develop a concrete plan citywide it's important for the businesses and for the continuous of the vital community. it's absolutely crucial we address this. with the opening of the arrogant store on the 552 hayes street recently and soon the opening of the pap pa bubble it's a spanish corporation it's marketing the erosion of our small business

community from an economic standpoint and from our merchant community we've worked hard to progress. i've lived in hayes valley for 23 years and i'll u i'd appreciate this if we do the citywide study. i know we're going to be providing input and working with the planning department. and a >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> commissioner and commissioner thank you very much for letting e let me speak i've lived here 90 inform 43 years. i've been responsible for helping start up businesses to

get into business. i sincerely request that you had a fuller study on the effects of the amendment proposed and that you look at this more carefully. i believe in balance and i believe some chains are great and other chains are not good at all. i feel there are a lot of miss achieved ideas whether it has to do with the volume. i think you know that good merchant do far better business than chances. there's a lot of wishes them taking real estate from locals. in fact, many of the times you'll get higher rent from locals than you do chains.

i honestly feel like trends change and there's been a acid decreases in the locals looking for space. i guarantee don't know to see blighted areas. i feel like we're a world-class city and we should be representative of what's around the world. i was at a cocktail party and it was asked why is there merchandise on a local area. i think which one neighborhood stops being unique another one starts. customers ultimately make the

decisions of the success of a tenant and we can't artifically do that. i sincerely hope you'll do a full study on the effects. i feel like if we put those restrictions on one neighborhood they'll role into the next. thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm dee dee workman from the san francisco chamber of commerce. the san francisco chamber of commerce representing over 15 hundred businesses urges you to poison the rough of the formula retail use of the hayes goes ordinance. this ordinance speaks to fundamentally modify this formula retail to stop

establishment where 50 percent of the establishment has fewer than 11 locations around the world. it will expand the definition without data or analysis to support them and it creates a confusing patchwork across the city. the better approach is to wait until the study is completed and the department has development a expensive packet of changes pr the san francisco chamber of commerce urges you to continue until that time. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm daniel i'm born and raised in hayes valley. and i've had the future to own a

business we do guided bike tours around the city. i have the that, of course, of not only a hayes resident but who brings tours into the valley. and one of the things we get to showcase is the authenticity of san francisco. we've taken - we've been in hayes valley since june and we've taken roughly 6 thousand 8 hundred and 6 people into the valley and they've been ecstatic of what's been going on. i'm proud to have a business within hayes valley and been

born here and it's something i think t is important to maintaining the benefit of the neighborhood >> any speakers. >> i want to give some insight in the last three weeks we've lost 5 businesses because formula retail has gone in and misrepresented facts to this floor and held the permits and passed the permit appeal period, started building and the neighborhood and merchants didn't have a chance to do anything because we were told the project has already started. my question is for hayes valley and for all of us where can we -

how can we start working towards having a better legislation that protects people all over the city. one of our rentals corporations moved down the street and we lost 2 businesses there. this is a citywide issue. all right. and we should get a handle on it but the fact is the first floor is not being recommended and they're coming and? the third time in a year we've had this happen and how do we stop human thank you from infamous i

falling down the hill. we need to study this and find a solution to it. okay. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon supervisors i'm ben. i work in the retail destroy representing local and natural retailers. i strongly urge the planning commission to hold-off on any action to present facts that's not based on opinions or protection itching of small businesses at the expense of the shows of neighborhoods and the residents of those neighborhoods. i noticed in supervisor breeze