except we all have to deal with construction noise if we want the city to be the vibrant city that it is. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'm maryanne massenberg and lived from the proposed site since 1972 and were on the

outskirts of the symmetry when it was a -- cemetery site and it was for cemetery workers. i'm going to address the eir in a moment but i want to remind us that we absolutely need housing. we're in support of more housing but we need to stress affordable housing. we don't need more housing for rich people. turning now to the eir. i showed concerns about the construction noise, pollution and the duration of the proposed projects. i have concerns too about the open space but mostly i want to address parking and the parking deficit and traffic congestion we already have in the neighborhood. having lived in the neighborhood 46 years we've seen increasing congestion even those of us with residential parking permits.

many homes were built before any parking requirements were made by the city. so many of them don't have garages or garages large enough so most of us are looking for parking all the time on the street. and it requires overall these years it requires many trips around many blocks and often times we end up parking even at night three or four blocks away and then walking home from there. if you go through the neighborhood, you see many people and homeowners and renters illegally parking across the sidewalk, to which we often are ticketed and that's because we can't find parking. we already have a significant parking problem and the e.i.r. has a section which talks about a study in new york and new jersey that proposes the premise that if have you fewer parking spacin spacings and fewer garages, people will have fewer cars and

drive less. in the development of the neighborhood it's been built out. there were lots of vacant lots and there's been significant additional buildings on california street across from the proposed site. they did not reduce the number of cars solely increased congestion. i ask you to consider looking at the e.i.r. the number of parking spaces proposed and if there's that many housing units, we need more parking. it's not beared out we have fewer cars because of fewer garages. with all due respect we choose to live in san francisco not new york. >> commissioner: thank you, next speaker, please. >> thank you, cory smith on behalf of san francisco action coalition. we have not reviewed the project yet and we look forward to diving into the details ahead of

the next hearing. speaking more generally, there's alternatives there we encourage you and the proj team to maximize the amount of housing. we're talking about 744 total new homes for san francisco families and young folks and people like me and i think it's an exciting opportunity. this is nestled between sacramento and california but we're also a couple blocks from gary boulevard. for people like me who advocate for an expansion below ground i'm a fan of the 15 feet above ground it's an easier and less expensive way to do light rail service across san francisco. i realize we're not there yet and i want people to vision what that would look like. i plan on riding the line at some point in my life. this will be about a block and a half away and folks will be able to get downtown it's part of the longer vision of everything we're going for. a comment on retail use.

i live on the other end of ha hait -- haight ashry -- ashbury and everything happening in the area is cool. the lucky penny's been mentioned a couple times and it's a new community and for the shops and businesses along the area all the small business owners will benefit from the foot traffic coming up and down in the area and again spending money at these small businesses. from the environmental impact, it can't be stated enough that the number one threat to our planet right now is global warming from a 30,000 foot big picture perspective. if we don't build the 744 homes here, they're going to be built out in modesto and merced and

fresno and they'll be commuting into the san francisco bay area because it's a fantastic place to be and it will put more co2 in the area and slowly continue to kill our planet and that's what we're all trying to avoid. we love the fact that all the neighbors are advocating for the street line construction process. i hope that that can also apply to the permitting and approval process. so i echo all of them in make this go faster, let's build this faster. i think that is commendable because everybody does understand we do need more homes for people to live in and of course to close in reference to the yard. so i ask you to look at it through the lens of the quality of the e.i.r. and not the project itself which we will have a hearing on in the future. >> thank you, next speaker, please. if there's anybody else that would like to speak, now is your time. please line up on the green side of the room. >> i'm joan barone and live

across at 3220 california street between laurell and walnut and we have actually a residential neighborhood. i think that anyone has acknowledged that when i read the draft e.i.r. and what is being proposed. we are 40 different residential units. we have over 100 people living directly across the street probably including probably 30 children more or elderly and if you're elderly you'll die before this project is finished. i'm sorry. the proposed 17 to 15 years not only will have a negative impact of our neighborhood and the 100 residents, let's not forget about those people directly across the street but everyone here has mentioned how

unconscionable it is the neighborhood will be held to a 17 to 50-year construction period when many people have been here the whole time does not have to take that long and the residential alternative which we support could be done in far fewer years. in fact, people have talked about three years. when we had many discussions with the developers and we appreciate that they have had those discussions. however, in those discussions, when we asked how long would the development take, we were told two to three years. many times so when i looked at the draft e.i.r. i almost dropped my jaw, 17 to 50 years is unconscionable. the other things that are unique to our concerns that were not addressed in the e.i.r. is the fact the developers are proposing a commercial loading

zone directly across the street from where these hundred people live. all along they asserted the underground will be in the e.i.r. and we were shocked to find that and that loading zone would be there after the project is over. so this is not a temporary thing. though the mitigation which was suggested in the e.i.r. which we think is not viable, they suggested because of the traffic impact of commercial loading, the loading happened before 7:00 a.m. and after 7:00 p.m. well, if you're one of the 100 people that live across the street, that makes absolutely no sense. and i think what was ignored was the 100 people across the people when you consider a commercial loading dock.

>> thank you, very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, i'm donna elshore and i missed much of the hearing i'm extremely concern about asbestos contamination. i don't know how that's being handled but i want to you know. >> thank you. any additional public comment on this item? no? okay, seeing none we'll close public comment. i want to ask a clarifying question on the 15 days -- i'd support extending this 15 days but i don't think we have the authority to do it. i think only you do but we can encourage you to do it, is that

right? >> you do have the authority. the chapter 31 of the administrative code allows for extension of the comment review period by either the environmental review officer or by the commission and we've asked that be by a vote for clarity. and if i may, i'd like to note that i did respond for a prior request for the draft e.i.r. and i can explain the basis for my decision that it wouldn't be warranted here. >> i agree. it doesn't seem like the most complex e.i.r. we've certainly see projects more complex with the truncated period and the holidays have a concern that it will take a while and i don't think 15 days will be a factor so i would support the extension but i get your rationale and agree with you. then there was the discussion of

the community alternative. it was flashed quickly but i haven't seen anything. do we have this alternative? according to staff, we don't recall receiving that yet. of course the comment period hasn't yet closed so we hope to receive more information about that. >> do you have that and want to submit that to us at this point? it would be great to have it. >> we have a draft and asked this be postponed. >> commissioner: it seems like a lot of people have seen it and we haven't. >> i have to do more checking and there are legends that go with it. we vuft -- just have the drawing so it's not finished yet but we'll get it in there. >> commissioner: there's a lot

of support for it but it seems people are supporting but if nobody's seen it i don't know how they're supporting it. >> we're working on it. >> thank you very much. we'll have comments on the d.e.i.r., commissioner moore. >> the document as constructed is accurate and well set up and follows what the apartment has done and i think it is thorough except when it comes to process and i'll repeat what i said in different circumstances, i think projects of this size have been recommended to be introduced to the public and as the commission in public hearings with presentations an introductions of the project which in this particular case has not occurred. i'd like to remind the commission and the public how smoothly how the locations

because they were properly introduced to this commission and the public who were interested in a manner that led public dialogue and commissioner's questions in a manner that do not clash as today's comments indicate. while many were not responses the e.i.r. hearings require it was quite obvious the community has community and concerns that should have been flushed out in meetings where the commission would have participated in hearing them. that said, thank you. i'd ask for a 15-day and support a 15-day extension because it is only through today's presentation by the developer that clarity was brought to what's intended even after

painful reading allowed me to gager and i'm a good reader and i'm verse in reading poems and many things were missing in this element and sections that a proper description about the project and its planning and urban design and intentions. moving on, i'd like to speak about process and encourage people in the future with large projects to bring the projects as they develop because it's the most fert i'll -- fertile ground to get what you need in the e.i.r. and the environment process which is complicated. this department knows how to do that except they cannot fully respond to the community's feelings that you very much brought to the table today.

when hear the concerns about the duration and project implementation, i agree 17 years or whatever the time frame is the first thing i would ask is what is the phasing of the project? i think one of the most important projects questions because the cumulatist -- cumulatist period of time -- cumulative periods of times allow people to understand what the actual impacts are relative to the location near project. by the same token, i'd be interested in seeing the cumulative impact on construction phasing and construction realizetion --

realization that the project is being taken down in 2019. the demotion of that site and construction of a large project on that particular site definitely has an effect with what's on the 333 california street side. i would be interested in further exemption how the parking which from an environment visual point of view increases the cost of construction. i'd like to see that against the express need for affordability on the site. the site already has particular issues which make construction more complicated because it has significant topography which adds adding to the parking will

accentuate the parking but i like the thought of affordability. i would support the community alternative and want it visually added to the alternative and would like to see that through the evaluated the sameness factor of the alternative as they proposed is a little bit disturbing to me because it's only about adding and subtracting pieces. there's not really new ideas in the alternatives and this may indeed add the completely different view on how the site is use and reflect the community concerns for example the

location of retail and where retail is, etcetera. i believe the avenue side is questionable. the site is more or less a freeway. sorry to use that word but that's what it is. i would like to use the experience of where the retail is strategically placed for corridors putting that much retail on this block say question to me -- is a question to me that creates a risk of

retail not succeeding. there should an backup strong and do we like to support retail and shopping centers in front of the commission and do we expect more in the sacramento and corridor? i'm and i would like the e.i.r. to take a closer look at the reality of how we look at retail. and look at affordability and parking and affordability not clearly addressed in the document in front of us.

and there's an invitation for to you look at that in the future. >> all right, commissioner melgar. >> thank you. so to start off, i would also support the extension of the row view period but i'm wondering if that's enough time to in cor rate another alternative. there was the christian scientist church project. i haven't heard anyone comment talk about the existing building

my dad was an engineer and partial to modern and bauhaus architecture and i like how it builds into the area and i would like to see the alternative if it actually works and from an environmental point of view using something is more environmentally conscious than knocking something down and building anew. does 15 days give you enough time with holidays and stuff? >> the extension of the public comment period nor draft e.i. -- for the draft e.i.r. allows more time for the public and following the close the department will prepare a document and the schedule will depend in part on the nature and

complexity of the comments we received. we will take whatever time we need to adequately respond to the comments the public provides. there are some things about the project i do like and the ac rat rassy of the -- accuracy of the e.i.r. and it's adequate and thorough. brought up a point i hadn't thought about commissioner moore in term of the traffic. i like the childcare component. i think there's a shortage of childcare in the neighborhood. i spent a lot of time there and spent time at the j.c.c. and i can tell you the slots are very

sought after. it's a good addition to the neighborhood and would like to see more of what goes in the neighborhood and i look forward to an extra period for comments to come in. >> commissioner koppel. >> thank you. we don't often see housing projects on or near the west side or in district 2. it's good we're spreading out the housing not just on the eastern side of the town. i think it's an opportunity and i visited the site, 10.25 acres is a chunk we don't see often.

i frequented the site and it says to me stay out, you're not welcome. the site to me is called, uninviting, inactive, it has no retail and way too car oriented. this is definitely has opportunity site written all over it. i want to see as much done with this as possible. i think the draft e.i.r. is fully adequate and accurate. as far as i'm concerned i want to make the most out of the site as possible. >> commissioner richards. >> i guess in the process, the document goes out and shows the alternative plan. and maybe you would at the time you did all the work put that

into a g or h. you change one of these alternatives. i'd like to see it weighed against the other alternatives. the other thing i there's an inadequa inadequate preservation alternative so i'd like to see it in the model, do we have to go eight stories and how do we squeeze preservation in the alternative, what if you combine the b and c what would that look like. though there's alternatives that are different heights it's hard to impair them because you don't get the full programming for one

or the other. you get a partial programming. i think the full preservation is no alternative. i support the 15-day extension. i do understand from a point of view where the department was going with reimagining the street grid. we have had several projects that have come before us and put the street grid back and the power plant and projects and we had the alleyway but has a

negative effect on the building. where else do we have these kinds of office parks? we do a consideration of are we destroying the last of its kind or are we keeping a sense of what it used to be. it's partial preservation but those are my comments mostly process oriented. >> thanks. the e.i.r. is a tool so we're asking you to help vaement t-- evaluate the project and it's one of the better ones we've seen and anything brought up is addressed from no preservation to historic preservation to

partial historic preservation. it gives us the flexibility to do almost anything as a result of this and analyzes the impact and it's a tool to tell haus the impacks -- tell us what the impacts would and and we have an expert on it but the e.i.r. works. one is a level of historic building and it becomes a painted ladies for the most important building downtown though i agree with commissioner melgar i think the building is interesting, it's deep as far as historic goes. i'm sorry, go take a look at it. i didn't comment when you all

spoke, right? yeah, i didn't comment when you spoke. it's a historic example of bad planning. like the sears building on gary and the safeway down the stress on gary. it's bad planning and nothing i'd salute as an example of a great urban development. it's the opposite. the person who spoke about this being like the freeways it is like that and it's part of our history and we should forget. i don't think it's a historically significant resource but i'm not saying we should bring back the cemetery

and today it wouldn't get through the front door of the planning department and there's no higher alternative. i think the site could take more density than what's being proposed and a get people won't want the higher density but i'm not looking at it as the alternative and the developer said it slopes down and could take for more density and we're amiss by not looking at a higher density alternative and on the project itself, i'd encourage people to look at retail. it's not meant to mimic the village which is more and bigger

i think, i'm not quite getting the disconnect on the retail but i heard and would encourage to look at it time frame wise. i'm sure the community is aligned. nobody wants to wait for the project to happen. they invest a lot and the community wants it to happen. the time frame is the longest level. keep an open mind.

there's almost no better site in the city for housing than this site. i get the project in these areas around it act as an open state to the neighborhoods but it's limited to that laurell and euclid corridor in proposing open space. you walk around the site in the other areas and it's dominated by parking and private open space. it's not a welcome project but it's a fairly modest project that meets the zoning and doesn't go too far and i think it's a terrific location for

house. >> i support the density. i do not support the density on this one because we don't get anything for it. you get your affordable units on all units which i think is a better community benefit. i'm sure the developer would consider that. >> is everybody supportive of an extra 15 days on this? okay. any objection to it? >> take a vote? >> a motion for it. >> i'd like to make a motion that we extend the period for comments for the e.i.r. for 15 more days. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners. if there's nothing further a motion that's been seconded to ex tend the draft e.i.r. period by 15 days. [taking roll]

so moved the motion passes 5-1 with commissioner koppel against. >> would you give the state and the address remains the same. >> what does 15 days put us on, 5:00 p.m.? january 8, 5:00 p.m. written comments by then. thank you very much. item 18. if persons exiting the room can do so quietly, please. we have additional business to attend to. it's a conditional use authorization, commissioners. note you adopted a motion to intent on deny and continued it

to >> would remind members of the public so silence any mobile devices that may sound off. we left off on case number 18. conditional use authorization where on november 9, 2019 you heard the matter in closed public comment and adopted a motion to continue the matter to today and they have reviewed the previous hearing materials. >> good afternoon, planning department start. the case before you is a request for conditional use authorization pursuant to

186.23903 and 710 sections and allow a restaurant in a limited commercial use space and case was heard november 29 hearing. the commission adopted a motion to continue the matter to today's hearing. in addition to the additional public comment items included in the staff report before you today, staff has received four additional letters of opposition. the motion on november 29 hearing staff recommends disauto approval. -- disapproval and i'm available for any comments you may have. >> commissioner: thank you, project sponsor, we heard this before so three minutes and one minute for public comment. >> thank you for your time. i think part of the problem would be is people in opposition

do not understand what we are proposing. one gentleman asked me if we were planning to tear down the building. i think there's lack of understanding. members and staff, thank you for your thoughtful review of this project an for your continued reconsideration of its merits. today we're hearing passionate arguments from both sides of this proposal and know you will consider each and make your judgment based on what is best for residents. the property has been neglected for years not decades as you can see from the exterior photos in our application. it's been part of the community for 75 years and now it's little more than a dirty, unsanitary liquor store that pedals, booze,

junk food and cigarettes. it is my understanding the current proprietor has operated it over 10 years and you'll see in the coming presentations what that stewardship has brought. this property was purchased it will be three years come february by a neighbor. a neighbor born and raised in san francisco. his goal when he purchased this building was to alleviate the blight on this corner and to bring something in that would enliven the neighborhood. something that would enliven his neighborhood. the gentleman that owns this property lives on lake street. he has seen this building his entire life go from a vibrant neighborhood business and architectural gem into a dirty, delapidat

delapidated blooit on the corner of -- blight on the corner of california. you heard individuals approach the podium to tell you the business is run by a kind gentleman. they can get specialty food item and fresh food and fresh meat and fresh produce. only one of those citations was correct. the owner is a kind gentleman with a wonderful family of that none of us has any doubt but for them to imply the market serve the welfare of the neighborhood and its residents is disingenuous at best. i would ask you ignore comments such as those presented two weeks ago that would suggest the business would be better located in the vacant shell and ask you ignore -- >> commissioner: thank you very much. time is up. we'll open up for public comment

and we have one speaker card, margaret rafferty but others are welcome to speak. because we heard this before, you'll have one minute. >> face up. >> you need to show something? you can read it. there's a mic right there. >> clerk: ma'am, the microphone's right over here. >> sorry, i haven't done this in ages. what i intend to say is that the supervisor fewerer inspires us to do something and i can't think of one thing than to

support the california market and it sounds horrible. it isn't. it's a great place. the market is sensitive to the needs of the people in the neighborhood and when the irish in the neighborhood ask them to carry irish tea, they do. they will carry anything you ask them for. it has been a market for over 80 years. it's not blight, it is not nasty, it is wonderful. and there has been a market there for over 80 years and in my opinion it should be a legacy problem or certainly a historic building. thank you. >> commissioner: thank you, next speaker, please. >> good late afternoon. the owner, jasser say father and husband. the store been nothing but very kind to us residents. it brings in stuff i need and it

would be a travesty to let this market go. we do not need another restaurant. walk up to clement and gary, have you 30, 40 restaurants up there and 75 years, let's make it 100. thank you very much. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> i'm charles. thanks again for letting me appear before you. my house is two doors down from the market. i don't live on lake street. this is my neighbor. the store is my neighbor.

>> next speaker, please. >> hello i am a member of the planning association in the richmond and also a member of

our lady of because some russian orthodox church which is located directly next to the market. we have been next to new california market for over 60 years and have a very positive relationship with the market and the market owner. last time i presented signatures from the entire church congregation, we have will have additional signatures for a total of 250 people who want to see new california market stay in the neighborhoods. in addition to that, is a letter from the archbishop who lives in the neighborhood. he is the archbishop of the russian orthodox orthodox church on the west coast. and he feels very strongly about the impact of the loss of new california market to the church and it is very adamantly opposed to the granting of conditional use authorization to represent. >> thank you. any additional public comment on this item?

seeing none, we will close public comment. commissioners? commissioner fong? >> thank you. >> excuse me. can you have that turned off, please? >> take it outside. >> yeah,. may be we need a phone store here. >> i will stay pretty consistent with my comments and thoughts from last time we heard this. the market does serve a use. i live nearby, and i just, purely by coincidence, not really thinking about this project, went by for an onion and no onions are sold there.

so the last week i am making some soup and i had a white suit on and i had to go down to the other store on california about three blocks away. i'm not judging the entire story based on an onion, of course, but i'm not sure if it is the kind of market that can be there and i will say the same comment as last time. is a very produced rich area in this neighborhood. again, my ideal situation would be to see some new foodservice restaurant use in maybe with a small market attached to it are part of it for those essentials with special orders that some folks need. so i am going to be supportive of the project, and be supported of door supportive of the conditional use. >> commissioner moore? >> i still have not heard any further elaboration of why this needs to be a restaurant given the proximity of the other

restaurants and the possibility for restaurants around the corner. the neighborhood expressing their support a strong and clear to me, and since i live in a neighborhood where i have corner stories of similar dish of a similar kind and know the importance and the fabric of the neighborhood café will continue to support the denial of this. >> commissioner richard squaw. >> mr gomez, can you come up please? could you show us the map that you did and give me a narration and show us the photo squaw, please don't show us the photos? please. >> one more turn. perfect. yes. >> a year ago when we started planning for our café, we looked at the market and what services

would be taken away from the neighborhood and i located about six establishments. some produce and some liquor stores where neighbors can go and get the goods they would get from new california at one of these locations. i wanted to show -- i wanted to show a little bit of what i found. >> i'm nervous up here. this is mainland markets. this is on the corner of gary and 20th. it is a full-service market. it offers produce, it offers meat and cheese, it offers everything you would want in a store. here is the pictures of their selections. these were all taken yesterday. next door there is a liquor store to the mainland markets. it is called martell's and it is

also at gary and 20th. here is a picture of their store they have a nice wine selection. here is there liquor selection. next door, there is a produce market that is also very close by. >> could we see the photos of the existing business that we are talking about? >> the business we are talking about -- >> great. >> this is the façade of new california. as you can see, it is an older building. it is all those little windows on top of where it says new california market are glass.

they are all covered up. there is signage and all the windows. it doesn't have good light and it is -- >> what does the inside look like? >> this is a close-up. >> we have people -- we have these that are painted over in my neighborhood. >> i wanted to show you the inside to give you the idea. this is the story. as you can see, the shelves are bare, and there is garbage and boxes around the walkways. here is another picture of the shelf. as you can see the picture to the left, the floor is pretty dirty there. and my other stories that i walked through, the floors were immaculate. by was a resident in the neighborhood i definitely would shop at those types of stores before i would stop. they don't clean it up. the shelves are bare. the packaging is not taken out.

here is another example. >> got it. okay. >> and another thing was if you look at -- there are boxes and all kinds. >> audit. okay. >> the person that runs the market, do they have a lease squaw. >> they have no lease. they are month-to-month. >> if we denied you today, you could go get an operator that you could feel would raise the bar like these other markets that you showed at the very beginning -- >> i'm not the landlord. >> okay. >> the landlord can probably -- >> i get it. >> who is the landlord? is a landlord not here? >> let me see. she is here. >> will you ask him a question? >> sure.

i guess along those same lines, why not change this tenant, or do something with the existing tenant, or find another use? >> i am the landlord. i bought the building about three years ago as stated. when i initially bought the building, i did not have the luxury of owning it for 40 years prior. when i went to get financing for the property, the 2950 that the tenant was paying doesn't even cover my property tax or my mortgage. a few months after, he knew he had about a year left on his lease. we talked when i went into his store and he basically said, i would like to get a renewal on my lease. so i told him, given where my mortgage is, my property tax, my insurance, everything is going up. i told him, what can you afford to pay given the fact that you operate the restaurant? and i told him, your lease is

coming up. you have virtually just a few months left. it will go down -- go up to 3,050. what can you afford to pay? i would like to get something close to market rent. he said what is that? and i said you tell me what you need to operate your business. if you let me know, let me know if i can work around those numbers. he said he would pay me $4,000. i said that will not work. he said what do you think will be able to work? and i said probably somewhere around 55-$6,000. that is just on a gross lease. and he said, i don't think i can afford that. you think about it. he said he needed to talk to his partner. and i said talk to your partner. two months later, he comes back to me and says, i can't afford the rent. i'm looking at other places in the area. is about $5,000 rent. he said go ahead. you can put it out for lease. so i basically approached jason

gomez who sold me the building and i asked him to take an evaluation of the market rent in the area. he took the survey and came back to me and brought me matt that has two restaurants in san francisco. i went to look at the restaurant his, successful operator operating on mission street. he was invited to the building to open his new place. he is from the neighborhood. his family is third-generation. so he basically said to, i will pay you $7,500, triple and i will put $600,000 into remodelling the building. given the fact that the tenant said go ahead and lease that yourself, i told him, it will be rented. he says fine, i can't pay anywhere close to that. about three months later, he calls me back and he says my partner wants to talk to you again. his partner calls me back and we met and he says, can i pay you

$5,500? and then he said may be 5,000 and we can step it up to $6,500 over time. i let somebody else rent it. he says okay. so i know she says, when the lease comes up in october, the lease says month to month and you can raise it to whatever you want. i said you i will not be like that. you play just pay 3,050 now take time for the restaurant and no take anywhere from six months to a year to get on the planning schedule. you can stay at 3,050, month-to-month, i will give you sufficient notice when he gets there his conditional use. whether it is up or down. and a reserve to the money because you will need money to buy another location or get set up somewhere else. >> okay. did you have a follow-up? >> no. that explains a lot. >> that leads to where we are here. commissioner melgar?

>> i am more confused now than i was before he. so you do have a tenant already who has lease the space? >> correct. >> subject to him getting approval from this body. >> i see. so there is something about -- i'm not convinced like commissioner moore. thank you very much. >> stay up in the front row. we may have more questions. thank you. >> so you are asking us for a conditional use, and we have to decide whether this is necessary and desirable. the pictures you showed are not consistent with what the communities saying. so i actually did go to that markets. i wasn't looking for onions, i did see the produce, but it

wasn't dirty when i went. i bought come mucha. they did have a pretty good selection for a little corner market. i was impressed with what they had. i thank you are making an attempt to deal with a different population. so it bums me out this that small markets like this can't survive in this city. i understand that where the landlord is. financially, but you knew where it was when he bought the building. so i think that we are being asked to make a decision that will provide value to you at the expense of an existing business, and i am not sure that i want to do that. i am not going to be supporting this project. >> i think we -- the director reminds me, we are going -- this decision is not about the market

it is about a conditional use and the change. i would like to ask the sponsor team about the restaurant. what are you proposing, what type of restaurant, what size, what is a seating capacity, what is the delivery? >> this is great. >> that is really the question. >> it will be a breakfast and lunch café specializing in breakfast and lunch and coffee. i have a menu here. i can put it under here or i can hand it out. >> you will get the right one. >> i will get it right eventually. >> what is the mission restaurant called? >> it is materials taco. >> his are more than one location or operation that you have? >> yes. that is my partner. we have two. >> so you own the restaurant? >> yes.

yes. >> can you share a little bit more beyond the menu of how you want to make improvements to the building acceding outside, sitting inside only? >> sure. >> hours of operation, bar, hard liquor, no beer, no wine or liquor? >> and you have them over so we can take a look at it? >> our passion is food and service. it is very gratifying to see people eating at your establishment and smiling and happy and having a great time. and we were looking to be in a neighborhood location and that's why yk when doug bought the building, we had conversations about possibly putting a restaurant there and we walked the neighborhood and we talked to people and they really do feel the operators who have restaurants there, they say they