o allow this case to clear for those persons that are in the -- well, just one second. if i could have the interpreters, the spanish and chinese interpreters, please?

if commissioner wu you were present for the beginning, to leave early and you reviewed the remainer of the morning and commissioner moore youbut you had and falls within a 40 district. as mentioned the project was initially heard october 16th 2014 and continued to today. after significant public testimony, both in support and opposition of the project, planning commission continue had had item to raise a number of issues to discuss a number of issues including the concentration of ncds in the exkelsior neighborhood and potential enforcement issues of existing ncd with respect to storefront transparency and compliance with conditions of

approval. and also the discussion to potentially increase the green zone in the likelihood that recreational use would be legalized in california in 2016 the planning code section requires any ncds seeking to locate within 500' of another ncd may be allowed as conditional use provided that other are also met. under current log ontoion, they would have require a conditional use authorization to be located in close proximity to one another. based on preliminary staff analysis, only a small area would fall outside of the 1000' radius of school and another ncd within the excelsior mission near the intersection of mission street and geneva. a map was enclosed with your commission packets which discloses these areas. up up to two more ncds would be

located that [speaker not understood] currently three ncds are in operation in the neighborhood and two applications are pending including the subject property. there are other neighbors with other relatively high concentrations of ncd including soma, mission with 6 ncds and the outer commission with three. according to dph staff there are 28 active ncds in the city. due to zoning rostrictions the location of ncds is limited to neighborhood-commercial district causing the concentration to feel much denser in the outer exexcelsior neighborhood and in con from the and ncds are permitted to locate nearly anywhere in the soma district. while staff and police department have received correspondence and comments expressing concern about the existing and proposed [tph*-bgtd/]s, enforcement staff recounted no formal complaints have been received from the neighbors or police department for the existing ncs.

staff reviewed conditional use on mission street and permitted site visits to determine compliance. the three same conditions of approval were placed on both ncds namely safety and security plan, lighting, green area and storefront maintenance and i can ethe loan elaborate on these if commissioners have questions. both ncds were found to be in compliance with safety and security and lighting conditions. the ncd at 5234 mission street was found to be non-compliant with the landscaping requirement and enforcement case was opened november 1, 2014. additionally the ncd at 5234 was found knob non-compliant with storefront tranceparence requirements and enforcement case for this was opened december 1. from the pubed case report our staff determined that it's also non-compliant with storefront

transparency guidelines and a case was opened december 8., 2014. with respect to the green zone, currently ncds are limited to their proximity to school and community facilities primarily serving youth and legislation change or restrictions of ncd and lower density neighborhoods must be passed in order for the green zone to expand. i just wanted to communicate that for the record. if and when the ballot measure more recreation marijuana passes staff will conduct analysis and work with the planning commission and board of supervisors to determine the appropriate regulations and guidelines. since the hearing on october 16th, planning department received a packet from the outer mission merchants and residents association which include a petition opposing the project with approximately 165 signatures. staff also received a coordinatence expressing discontent about the provided militarization of the block from security guards and proximity of ncds to elementary schools and associated concerns to safety of children and

finally, a letter -- rereiterating concerns about behavior concerned near existing ncds excluding alleged drug dealing and consumption of marijuana on streets and inside businesses. the department has received over 210 letters of support for the project since the october 16th hearing and 40 remain from the out irmission and excessior neighborhoods and coming from immediate adjacent neighbors, et cetera. since the publishing of this report, the memo commission has received -- staff received approximately ten more letters supporting the project. in order for the project to perceive, the commission must decide whether or not to take distribution review and approve the proposeded nct at 5420 mission street pursuant to planning code section 791.141 and 745.84. the planning commission should

only take discretionary review if the commission finds that profitity of the proposed [tph*-bgtd/] to existing ones are extraordinary and are exceptional circumstances to justify review of the project. and/or to approve the recommended conditions or to improse conditional ones. the planning department staff's review is generally limited to the location and physical characteristics of ncds to ensure their compliance with the zoning code. accordingly staff recommends approval for the following reasons: the ncd complis with all standards and requirements of the planning code, 5400 block as well served by transit, it's more than a thousand feet from primary and secondry schools and any known active permitted youth services facility. and employment levels are estimated to be between 24-30 part-time employees and the following conditions have recommended for imposition on the project col cot the operator shall mantain the main entrance and all sidewalks

abudget the property in clean condition and maintenance shall include minimum daily sweeping letter pick-up, disposal or washing of the main entrance and abutting sidewalks once every month. project sponsor shall main tare odor control methods, and you enclosed garbage area. all garbage containers kept within the building until pick-up by disposal company. the establishment shall implement a security plan and review the proposed surveillance system with the police department to ensure it's adequacy for evidentiary purposes. the commission may impose other conditions for good neighbor policies that have been practiced with other establishes such as restaurants and bars. this concludes staff'srencing

presentations and i'm happy to answer questions. >> project sponsor. >> he with preciate the five minutes tonight. we will be very efficient with that time. i will turn the podium over to robert jacobs and talk about the neighborhood and what has happened since the last meeting. want to talk about two legal issues and the first is the standard of review that we don't really talk about much, but it's very important here and second leads into clust ering issue that is going to be of importance tonight. it's really critical to keep in mind as we start this hearing, keep in mind this is say permitted use. that is where we have to start - we're here before the planning code does require this hearing. it's a mand ory -- >> i'm sorry, andrew, if i could just pause your time? people, we need to turn off the phones, because it's very disruptive and inconsiderate to the people who are presenting, as well as the commissioners. if you don't know how to

silence your mobile deviolation, just turn it off or go outside. thank you. >> huenga. >> sorry andrew. >> thank you. to continue on, the critical issue that we're going to start is this a permitted use. the planning code in the new zoning districtez mcds are permitted uses and we're required to be here for mandatory discretionary review hearing that is for sure, but this is not a project approval hearing. in a project approval hearing like others you have heard today and you hear every week, cu u conditional use authorization and 309 applications the burden on the applicant to prove to you that their project is worthy you have your support and that is the way the procedure works. discretion are eye review isre very different. the burien is floton the applicant. you start with the premise that is a permitted use. what we're here to talk about is whether are there are extraordinary or exceptional exceptions presented by the case that and that is the key? i think there

might have been confusion whether there was a conditional use authorization or a burden or there were obligations and indeed the applicant needed to come forward with certain types of findings. that is just not the case here. this is like every other dr case, it's exceptional and extraordinary circumstances. the facts are relatively straightforward. this feeds into the clustering issue with the inner mission -- i'm sorry, the excelsior mission ncd, just about a-year-old and very fresh and new and the supervisors led by john avalos took the issue serly in terms of creating radiuss this had he believe and created a definition of "clutcher." a cluster radius is 500'. here as the staff has already reported and as can you see on the overhead we're well beyond the two existing mcds at the upper part of mission street

are well over that. that means that by definition, i think the board of supervisors has already said concentration issues are within 500' and we're well beyond that and don't believe there is a concentration issue here. i'm going to turn it over to robert to finish up the presentation. thank you very much and we're also available for questions. >> madame president, commissioners and staff, thank you for taking the time to review us again this evening. my name is robert jacob the executive director of sparc and we heard the commission loud and clear in october to demonstrate support from our future neighbors in the excelsior and outer mission and so happy that the neighbors are here in person to talk about why they support our proposal. in your packets in total turn we have 330 letters of support, 255 of those letters of support are from the 94112 and adjacent zip codes of proposed location and present a letter from the ky neighborhood association that has represented our

location since 1939, it states clearly that the cia support our application due to consistent communication with their board of directors and willingness to work together and sparc does not create negative clustering effects like the other dispensaris and hope it demonstrate our strong support today. sparc is different and how we operate is fundamentally different than other mcds. we adrop thed a street, which is slated to be san francisco's next living alley. over four years' of operation we have never not had one community complaint, code violation or secret threat. sparc is the only mcd in san francisco to be [hro-eupbs/]ed under washington, d.c.-based patient for certification program. sparc is different from other dispensaries in the level of care and service provided to patient and how we relate immediately and to our immediate neighbors. the outer mission neighborhood deserves a quality dispensary and sparc is here to meet that need. i hope the commission had a chance to read the letter by

district supervisor jane kim, testifying to sparc's positive presence for the neighborhood around our existing dispensary. sparc is most different pin how hard we work to be good neighbors. we hope that the public testimony that you hear today will coin vince you to support our project. i'm available for questions any time throughout the hearing and i have some documents to hand out. >> mr. lattimer? >> my name is david latterman and i live in the excelsior and work in the excelsior and although i'm concern certainly no leader of the people who have come here to oppose the clustering of the mcd clubs i think i can speak on behalf of

the them, since i have been in conversations with them for many months about this. as somebody who lives in the excelsior and works in the excelsior and owns a house in the etch sellsor and raising three children in the excelsior, i guess i guess as much say as anyone about this and i am for the record neighborhood. this issue, we can talk legalize on what exactly is "clustering?" but i think all of you have seen the maps of what the outer mission and the excelsior has turned into. there are two adjacent pot clubs already south of geneva, there are two on ocean, there is one a lit more to the north on mission at -- north of silver at green cross and petition for two more coming one next to green cross and yet another one, which is around the mission and geneva area. so this if this isn't clustering i don't know what is. i'm not here to say anything negative about sparc per se, but there is say reason that

ceqa for instance deals with cumulative impacts and that is where we are today. when you have so many clubs in such a small radius and the legalize of 500' versus 600, okay. but 600 and 800' you have seen the map and if this isn't clustering, i don't know what is. there is no neighborhood that has so many clubs so close to each other and after a mile while, you start to work with the cumulative impacts and start to see the blight and start to see the security issues and start to sea all the other neighborhood issues of i bit about the neighborhood. i think most of you have been down there and seen it. this area hasn't been treated as other ones in san francisco. i won't go as far as to say it's blighted. but we haven't gotten the economic impacts that so many other neighbor neighborhoods have. and we are struggling. we are fighting to try to attract restaurants and bike shops and coffee shops and get them to spend $50,000 to

$1500,000 for ada improvements. >> please speak into the mic. >> all of these other issues, south of geneva to get them to come in and say hey, we're a neighborhood on the upspinning swing. that sent what is happening. all i want to do now is introduce all the people you are going to here, nearly all of them are from the neighborhood. i request, i humiditibly request that when people talk, whoever you are, you say what neighborhood you are from. even say what cross street you are from. 94112 is a big zip code. when you talk about adjacent zip codes it's 134 all the way down to the bay view or all the way out to lakeside. we start to move far away. so let's all say where we're from. what neighborhood? what street? i think that would be fair. and the people who have come here tonight, this isn't easy for us. we don't have the resources to hire large lobbying firms, to hire very extensive attorneys,

to hire community organizers who do great work in san francisco. we have enough to get a few buses who are willing to come here in the rain, on a nasty night to state their case as to why this is enough. it's not about sparc exactly. it's about there are just too many of these and it's not allowing us to develop the neighborhood the way we want to. that is really all i have to say at this point and thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. i'm happy that all of the neighbors when have come in are also going to have the opportunity to say their piece and i hope you hear our petition or you hear our side of the petition and understand that enough is enough. and why is it has been the land of the mcd? and especially the southern part? excuse me, part of the 11 become the place where everything else is being sort

of dumped onto? why aren't these clubs in the marina? why aren't there five clubs in a half-mile radius of the castro? felon graph telegraph hill, that would be awesome to have one on telegraph hill, exception for our neighbor, and they don't expect us to fight back, a neighbor of a lot of low-income, people of color, asian, latino, to be able to come here and mount some kind of defense of our neighborhood. with that, thank you again for the opportunity to speak. and and i hope you hear everybody. >> thank you. we're now going to take those who need interpretation. that is correct, if it pleases the chair, we can let our terms go. i believe there are less spanish-speaking or members of the public that need spanish interpretation. oh, excuse me, would you like

to hear from -- >> i'm captain joe mcfadden, the captain of inningside department and i'm a native san franciscan and grew up in noe valley, but spent a lot of time in the excelsior and i worked from ingleside from 91-94 and know the excelsior very well. i'm not here to peak about the benefits of medicinal marijuana and i'm not here to speak about sparc. i have nothing personally against sparc. i'm sure it's a great organize as mr. latterman as stated. what i ham here to speak to you is about the same thing mr. latterman is the people of the excelsior district and the hard-working civil-minded people, long-term residents and merchants and most of them have lived there all their lives and grown up there and generations of these residents that have been there and merchants also. they truly care about their neighborhood. they have a supervisor that

doesn't support them or represent them in any way whatsoever at all. and, in fact he stated in a public comment that 95% of the people were against these clubs in that area. and that is a very telling sign to you, the commission. and they feel that they are a victim of this planning commission. and that is what i get from these community meetings that i lead under my c pap president, who is fantastic. you heard there several merchants in the past meetings about the blight these clubs bring upon the neighborhood and and i'm here to say that they are very true concerns about the clubs that we see. you heard from last meeting sparc supporters none of them who live or reside in the neighborhood. they are businesses. they want to come in and make money, at the behest of some of the people who are there and they are not there and don't live around and deal with the problems of the mcd participants that have come out. i hear about them. the community hears about them and they deal with them. i know that a few representives off and on from this commission have done some

fieldwork on this and have gone out and i applaud anybody that has gone out, christine has and checked on the clubs, but it amounts to a fieldtrip. we're talking about people dealing with it on basis of 24/7. they might be in compliance on the five-minutes that you are there, stay there for a day, two days, a week, live there and you will understand exactly what they are talking about. what i am requesting more is an overview of the rules and regularations of these clubs. we have talked about the permitting process. some of the proposed conditions that they have brought up is they are only governed by one single representative from the health department. he he say great resource, but one man and how is he supposed to check on all complaints and do compliance checks on all of these clubs? it's ridiculous, absurd to have one person checking all the clubs. when i talked to him he just

responds to compliants, but they have to be formal, written complaints documented by police report or something else. what there needs to be is some sort of compliance check with all of them on a routine basis. constant review. and one person from the health department can't do that. most of the residents and merchants are not anti-pot. they are not anti-sparc. they are anti-clustering and what they want to ask and you heard it before, what is enough? they said there three there and another three in the application process, and they went to get them through. this is a neighborhood that likely latterman said you and you hear from some of the residents who are affected by this on a daily basis, as well as the police department? why can't you limit these clubs and why can't sparc buy out one of the existing clubs? i believe if you put a limit on it, they with find another spot

of one that is already exiting. they don't see the impact on a dale litigation basis. they control in and work their business and they are gone. these are the people who work here and these are the people that you want to consider and i request that you don't turn a blind ice eye to what they say, because they live in it. i live in alfred everydays working as the captain of the ingleside. they are surrounding areas are not geneva and mission and not excelsior, as mr. latterman brought up. i want you to consider these points when you talk about authorizing this club because you are affecting these people and their livelihoods. thank you. >> captain. >> anybody in the overflow

room or in this chamber who need spanish translation, please come forward. >> and to ask the interpreter to make that announcement on the mic, please? >> and maybe possibly announcement also from the chinese term? >> once we have completed the spanish speakers we'll move to the chinese speakers. >> should we start with the chinese translation until we have some spanish-speakers arrive? we do have several speaker

cards? >> yes. >> and again, just to reiterate, speakers will be afforded one minute. >> the first speaker -- >> are you in need of spanish translation? why don't you come forward? >> translator: my name is melba and i live in 46 roeder street