street facade and if i could have it on the overhead, here you see the existing versus proposed. the existing is currently a rather solid, noninviting and nontransparent facade. it has been approved already for a more transparent pedestrian parenedly lobby that also provides -- lob lu that provides access to stair and elevator. however, you could easily convert this into a retail use if you ever were in a situation where the retail was viable again. what you don't see in the images, however s compton place with this block is essentially a narrow alley that is improved with back of house entries and no one is going to wonder off compton place in searchover stand alone upper floor retail. it doesn't have a lot of pedestrian foot traffic or the appeal, and on the overhead again, here are images that show the alley in both directions

from 220 post. the likelihood that a retail business would want a stand alone third floor office space that is accessible from an alley that provides minimal foot traffic, marginal street visibility and has some security issues is in our opinion simply less than minuscule. on the overhead, i want to post one more image which is looking at the alley from grant street and if you see the orange box, that is where the third floor business is. pretty tough to see. pretty unvisible. so with all that said, nothing prevents the third floor and the upper floors being turned back into retail if at some future point that becomes viable. project does not include any physical changes that would preclude that, so i am going to let the project sponsor speak about the actual efforts to lease this building, but before i go, in your packet, you have

support letters that collectively include 41 signatures in support of the project including a leter from members of the street building at 210 post which includes 33 signatures representing 18 different businesses. i will turn it over to mark. >> thank you. 220 post, we have been marketing that building for three years. and we have been talking to tenants both retail, quasi-retail, and even office subject to a conditional use permit. and we found no taker. we talked to prada, lulu lemon, lewis vuitton, maz ratry, ralph lauren, tesla, and we talked to probably 100 tenants and not anyone that would take the upper floor spaces. and in fact, what we foresee happening is that we're going to have to because the second floor can't be converted to office, we

have a 50 foot store front and we will have to carve out an entrance for the second level to get up to the second level off post street. and to carve out three entrances on that, none of them will be viable and give enough identity for the amount of space. the floor plates are a little over 6,000 feet. on the third floor t quasi-retail are not 6,000 feet useers. at best they are maybe 1,000 and mid block with windows just on the north and south which if we try to break up user, users with no window, no light, no air, and i don't want to rent space to people who don't have light and air. the other thing is i can tell you that we talk about economics, and the rents have on the retail areas in the streets are down probably almost 30% around union square just to signify the structural change and that is on the ground floor i am talking about. we tried. we don't have anybody interested in leasing this building.

and i have seen this not just in san francisco, but in los angeles and new york and miami. it's a global phenomena, really. and appreciate your listening to our concerning and are here to answer any questions. >> thank you. we will now take public comment. i feel like it's the same cast, same call. >> very supportive of this project as well for similar reasons as 146. again, we want to fill the upper floors. and bring people downtown and that will frequent the businesses and bring vibrancy to union square. we are particularly excited about proposing an entrance on compton place and we have been trying to activate that alley for a long time with art and two different grants to put art on the back streets and food and

entertainment down there with the possibility of another entrance down there would really contribute to the vitality. very much in support. thank you. >> next speaker please. >> richard lee and this is a different spin. i am actually representing owners on each side of 220 post. compton alley that is not very pretty. there is no foot traffic and the foot traffic that is there is undesirable. it hasn't gotten better in the last 10 years and actually gotten worse. the proposal is a very transformative proposal that is very welcoming and just look at the signatures. there is quite a few signatures.

and back to the project and approach often. and i am on each side. this is awful. and what will happen here? is anyone coming? mr. sfeffen expressed to you there is no takeers. and i don't know what to say because i am not from mr. steffen's office, but all i say is let's cross your fingers and see what happens. and it's been about five years since saks fifth avenue for men vacated 220 post and he already explained to you it's never been the same. >> and is another year and talking 2020. and feel like that is my property. take that and following up what is happening closely and internationally and not just

union street. and rates have come down. and information on that and i don't need to see much more. >> and there is no question about it. and also contributes to the city coffers and occupancy tax and with occupancy, the landlords hopefully can start playing the property taxes on time and basically it's not just money, but there is foot traffic and lights. and ms. hester talks about lighting. >> and he made it and --. >> thank you. next speaker, please.

>> sue hester, i was hoping that he would make me happy by talking about the abundance of lighting in the building. and so he didn't make me happy. 2 the building owner by compton street as well as post street. and dark alleys are a problem. and they are unsafe and people don't want to wonder down them. if they feel safe and i am sure you do as well. the building owner, not the tenants, has to provide these conditions. and you are giving the value a

lot of value when you are declining market and prices for retail and exploding increase in presents for offices. owners are evaluated by rent entitlement. the owner will have the benefit and should have the obligation in perpetuity for lighting the street and the planers should go over the plans and make sure they are part of the plans and the supervisor should as well. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? >> this issue with the retail disappearing is going to get worse and worse and seeing formula retail vacating very come innocent spaces and that is

a huge sign to me that business is not looking good. near my office the g.m.c. and a see's candy with huge parking lots literally went out of businesses and vacated the premises and next to a starbucks that also vacated. i respect this is a five-story building and the recommendation may not be to take over half of the building, but i literally don't see an opportunity for the even three floors to be rented. the 6x6 center literally still completely vacant as far as retail goes, and that is a huge, huge building on fifth and market primetime. i would be in support of giving -- i never want to take away the first and second stories. i will give you that every single day of the year, but i

don't see the places getting rented out by retail. i would be supportive of granting the third, fourth, and fifth story with the other condition of installing the lighting in the rear alley. >> commissioner moore. >> we are just experiments with the perception of the retail square and the office and i would like to keep a balance and i do strongly support the department's analysis that no building should be more than 40% of office at this time at least. we can change that policy if the policy and sitting there and that only candidates like chanel and the highest end stores are being considered to occupy the spaces.

i don't think that bodes very well for how we look at more inclusive offering of retail spaces in downtown. so i personally would at this moment be very measured in my support for office. i do believe we have created a strong legislation that is balanced are the objectives. my recommendation stands with the department and i can only support two floors. again, there are other opportunities to revisit this after a while. we have many buildings which will try the same and plenty of space becoming available and i believe in looking at it in a measured way. >> thank you. commissioner diamond? >> could either staff or the project po point explain in more detail why you can't do a retail entrance and why it has to be three individual entrances as opposed to combining them? >> to make it viable, tenants

want their store front identity and is all about identity. the minimum size is 25 feet of width to have the store front and attract customers and for a larger floor plate, they want a larger identity to signify it is a larger space inside. if your idea is to have unelevator up to the second and third, it is not individually branded and most of the tenants want more branding to show off the wares. beyond that, second floor and we might do an escalator because it is a direct access. and put an elevator to the third floor is longer. beyond that, it is going to be tough to rent the second floor. we have been trying to lease just the second floor at 146 and 220. we don't have any takers. we tried that. and to speak to ms. moore's comment, we have talked to promotional retailers, to discount retailers.

we talked to the real real and they are selling secondary merchandise. and we talked to everyone about this. we're inclusive. anybody wants to rent, we are happy to went, but the vn identity and not a lot of 6,000 foot tenants. that is the real problem, retail tenants. it is hard to find 6,000 foot tenants on the ground floor, let alone the second. customers are lazy basically. they don't want to go upstairs. >> if i could speak to that and there is a misunderstanding that we are requesting we have retail and there are other opportunities for retail services. as long as you are open to the public, that is a permitted use and would not require a conditional use authorization. >> i did see that in the staff report and cure i don't say about the viability of the compton place entrance for that kind of retail.

>> i think it's a through property, and so it's -- i am not sure why they are choosing just to have the compton place entry. that is property owner's decision. i am not sure what is behind that and what is driving that. >> i am a little confused. how would you see people getting to the third floor? >> it is a through lot and extensive work being done on the building. >> and entry off post street. >> thank you. >> commissioner richards. >> i guess when i want of the third floor of hair salons and are destination places because people have the favorite hairdresser or whatever. i think people have the destination places that could be suitable for a third floor and you go and have your color done

every month and favorite barber and hair stylist. i think i like the measured approach. let's go with the upper two floors and see if we get a taker that is not prada or somebody who would probably never want that space and market to, like staff said, something that is open to the public that actually would be needed. i don't know what the concentration of hair salons is and just picking on -- >> what is that? >> there is one hair salon in town now that is about 10,000 feet at 77 main lane. and almost all the rest of them are 2,000 feet and about 6,000 feet is a really large hair salon. >> so one of the things that we keep telling new project sponsors when they come with new buildings is you will have to start thinking in smaller increments. >> the problem with that is that this building is mid block. and it has windows just on the

north and south. so divide that into smaller increments, some of the tenants won't have access to light. >> so you have 3,000 square feet. which is still larger than most of the useers. i don't want to put somebody in a space where they don't have windows. >> commissioner moore. >> i still see jewelry appraisal, watch repair, and that can be downtown using the spaces and kind of like the third floor retail culture of pedestrian which i would like to keep concentrated in downtown to such time. >> commissioner koppel? >> i have to disagree and this landlord has been trying to rent the space for three years. i don't think it's going to fill up.

commissioner richards. >> when my swiss walk breaks, i go to a building on the ninth floor and half the building seems empty. mr. seuss is probably 85. i don't know if there will be a son of mr. seuss. but i don't see 6,000 square foot spot even though i would like watch repair and i don't see a bazaar where you have little offices because a watch repair and the office is like 100 square feet. it is tiny. so there is kind of an al ba tros. and a good job about the less than minuscule chance for the third floor. i am going to support on this specific property to allow the office use on that third floor.

>> commissioner koppel, did you want to say anything? >> just quick. >> that is also taking into consideration the third block and to aprooef three and four and five with the condition to taud expeer yor lighting in the back alley. and -- with the exterior. >> i wanted to speak to the lighting question. i apologize to ms. hester for not going over this. this is approved by the historic design commission and on compton place it shows 15 to 20 light fixtures on the soffit and this is a recessed store front and to span that width. and with the plan from that

clarification. is this truly an albatross because of the configuration of the building or is this going to set a precedent for future building? >> an i currently have probably six additional applications to convert at the third floor to office and they are all generally coworking spaces and i think this is a trend. i think this is a precedent. i think that this -- i would -- i am not saying that we should keep everything vacant and there are a lot of different factors that are playing into the vacancies in downtown. and there is a lot that is going on. and the square footage that office space demands is much too precious, and that will never go

back to retail. >> so i'm not quite ready to let go of the third floor retail. i am not convinced. last year a presentation and before i take that plunge which will waive the way, i need to see hard data accompanied by the price per square foot that is being requested. and what can be supported by different the hair salon and maybe restaurant and there cease so many things that i would need to see some data on. so i am ready to vote on the staff recommendation and approve it on the fourth and fifth floor. however, since we know that there is high demand for co-working space and that it is not just in union square but adjacent chinatown, and i am

really worried about doing this lightly without any hard data. so that's where i would fall. >> we are not making the recommendations lightly. we like to have data to back it up and at that time the data was showing a demand for retail and a matter of getting education out there about what types of retail is permitted. it is not just selling shoes --. >> i would make a plug and to have to revisit that site and to get new updates and the world of co-working space has exploded since she was here.

i am interested in that. and i also realize that as commissioner koppel that has spated the world of retail has dramatically changed. it is perhaps not a world where saks fifth avenue took up all six floors. but what is the new world? i am not sure that i understand that. and yet i am not ready to say turn it all into office because we know that we can rent that out. that has profound repercussions for union square and chinatown. >> a commissioner diamond. >> i am really sympathetic to the arguments that the project proponent made, but i am really uncomfortable doing this as a one off and this feels like we need study and to apply in it a fair handed way. i did read that report and it

may be dated and that different recommendations are in order, but i am really sympathetic to that argument. >> commissioner, there is a motion, but did not hear a second. >> u a didn't you second it? >> i did. >> very good. >> shall i call the question? >> very good. commissioners, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve with conditions amending the conversion to allow it on floors three, four, and five. also requiring back alley exterior lighting. on that motion, commissioner diamond. >> no. >> commissioner fung. >> no. >> u a commissioner moore. >> no. >> u a commissioner richards. >> no. >> commission president melgar. >> no. >> that motion fails 2-4 with commissions diamond, fung,

moore, and melgar voting against. is there an alternate motion? >> commissioner diamond. >> i would like to make a motion to approve the project as recommended by staff. >> second. >> very good, commissioners. there is a motion that has been to approve the project with conditions as recommended by staff. commissioner diamond? >> aye. >> u a commissioner fung? >> aye. >> u a commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner richards? >> aye. >> commissioner koppel. >> no. >> that motions passes 5-1 with commissioner koppel voting against. that will place us on item 17 for 2018-007267ofa that is an office development authorization. >> good afternoon, or good evening president melgar and member bs of planning commission. before you is a request for an office allegation from the

office development limit authorizing up to 49,999 square feet of general office use. i would like to submit a revised motion for the for the record and looks like changes to clean up language pertaining to sponsor's contact, parking, and the recording of permit a and drawings. i have hard copies on hand and happy to go over the specifics if desired. the project 865 market street is at the southeast corner situated within the c3r zoning district three blocksout of union square with the distinct portion of the larger westfield center completed in 1988, this specific portion of it. the proposed project will convert 49,999 of existing retail, accessory office, and miscellaneous space at floors 7-# with the entry along the ground floor at # fifth street.

exterior work having been done by the historic planning commission due to the location and article 11kearny-market. mason-suter conservation district. and this includes replacing bronze sconces with glazed skwonss. it would add class one and two biking and showers and lockers and the amount required by code. while the project is largely limited to the conversion as defined by the planning code, it would rut in an increase in the gross floor area of approximately 7,870 square feet as the property already exceeds the base floor to ratio allowed under peks 2.10.2, this will require the purchase of transferable development rights. the department has received two letters in support of the project and nonexpressing opposition. the project is on balance consistent with the objectives and policies of the city's

general plan and finds the project to be necessary, desirable, and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. it will create additional office space at the top two floors serving to bolster employment and in an area immensely well served by transit, office use is permitted at the upper levels and conversion of the floors to a more viable use will maintain and enhance the remainder of the building as the anchor of the downtown retail district. based on the findings within the case report, they recommend approval with conditions. the project sponsor is here to provide a presentation of their own. >> thank you.

>> i am vice president of development and we are a global operator and developer of flagship destinations t majority of which are retail shopping centers much like westfield. and retail is in our d.n.a. and this project is key to a significant investment and the request is an office allocation, but this is not a typical office project. as you have heard already, both retail owners and tenants are in the fight for our lives and the growth in online sales and change in consumer preferences are forcing us to radically rethink our businesses. what are we doing about it? we are investing in marketing and advertising, customer service, new products and yes, in our real estate assets. we're investing because we have seen and we know when retail tenants and shopping center owners invest in their

properties, sales and traffic respond. >> yes, nordstrom is down sizing and we are seeking to back fill with office, but we spent a better part of two years to find retail and talked to entertainment uses, restaurants, we talked to specialty retailers, local and big box and just about everybody and nobody could make it work. even using the global reach of our company, we couldn't make it happen. nowhere in this country is there a shopping sent we are as many floors as westfield san francisco center. not in chicago, not in new york. the retail is why they succeed which is why the body amended the planning code to eliminate the need for a cup for the seventh and eighth floors and above. so we believe this investment is good for san francisco center

and mixed use buildings are inherently complementary with the office use supporting the retail and retail an amenity for the office. and we are going to do a full renovation and that includes improved lighting at the street level and the largest nordstrom in the portfolio and will remain one of the largest in the country. letters of support including one from nordstrom and they couldn't make it br are supportive of this project.

we believe they must continue to be the retail destination for san francisco with the approval of the allegation and give us the tools to help make stay that way. i ask for your support to approve the project with staff recommendations. >> thank you very much anymore presentations? >> i am going to try something a little weird here for public comment. do we have supporters and opposition? do we have any opposition to this project? i am still going to open up for public comment. if you would like to show your hands for support, that is fine, too. anyone else who does want to speak, please come up. >> good evening, commissioners. i am jessica low with the san francisco travel association and here to express our support for

the plan to modernize and the retail industry and experience is rapidly changing and this project would help westfield stay relevant to retailers, shoppers, visitors and many employee who is support this industry. last year san francisco welcomed 25 million visitors who spent $10 in hotel, dining and restaurants and shopping in the department stores and boutiques. this generated $770 million in taxes for general funds and we are supportive of this effort to modernize the property and so it can continue to attract visitors, shoppers and world class businesses to support san francisco's strong and vibrant economy. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good evening. i am kim and i am with cultivate labs in support of the retail to office conversion that is right sizing nordstrom and bringing re-investment into the center. cultivate labs is a community conscious nonprofit business

accelerator that is dedicated to promoting economic opportunity and developing a vibrant commissioner corridor. there are in proms that cultivate labs and divisions and is targeting the corridor and we work with the ground floor at the westfield and increasing activity and engagement at 814 mission where the location of the current san francisco filipino cultural senter is that is a special place for the community. and in the mutual interest and that the community has in visiting this neighborhood. the retail environment is as you

know changing rapidly and customers are either producing online or looking for specific retail experiences that are unique and can attract people into the area. and so for example, our really successful night market series has attracted 10,000 people yearly with over 75 small business owners offering products that speak to our community and our culture. and so in the end of this year in 2019, we have estimated over $300,000 in economic activity in some of the area alone. this is an added value to the city and san francisco sent arenaed working with the westfield on the undiscovered market this sunday to the dome and expect 800 people at this event. this is one example of how we are working together to keep working in the future promote this.

>> thank you. next speaker please. >> good evening, everyone. director for the filipino cultural heritage district. the mission is to preserve the thriving filipino community as well as the community institutions. i want to acknowledge the letter provided by westfield to work with the community as a cultural center serving the filipino community. we are hopeful to preserve the space as this overall effort to increase the visibility of the community as an integral part of the neighborhood with the community regionally and is an important asset and practice and place for the reservation and the growing inequality pricing our community out of the city.

to now this is a job center for many in the service retail and working with cultivate labs to promote mission street for small businesses and community institutions. we look forward to strengthening our commitment and the cultural assets and support economic development for small businesses. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good evening, commissioners. i have some letters from the construction trade council. and a long-standing relationship with westfield and the mall and

the ongoing operation and turn around. and ultimately the work that is being proposed here. here are the letters. this is mee neighbor. i don't object this this as all. you are part of the community in westfield and a low income community and filipino community that is right there. i am glad they are speaking for

you and have a relationship already. who you buy the t.d.r.s from is important. i am suspected from lower xhk communities. and if you haven't already bought them, do not go to an easy thing but go to a difficult thing where people might need the money. and that ended -- i have no concern about lighting. they are going to be lit. i am very familiar with the site. thank you very much. >> district six supporters and office development authorization. thank you. >> u a next speaker please. >> good evening. i promise i will leave after

this. i will speak on behalf of the union square bid and with the long-term relationship with westfield and i know mr. kitchen and i haven't seen you for a while. and that is another topic to discuss. and all i can say is i would ask for your support. changing times. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? with that public comment is closed. >> public comment is close. there is no additional tdrs to be bought because the building is not changing the height. it is using to convert the upper

part and it is well done. and with this historic project on the 50 post street building as well and that is another topic. trying to get that in there. and overall i am pleased that the project has large community support not just like a shopping center, but a living and engaged project that addresses the entire project support. i am support of the project and move to approve. >> second. >> a commissioner richards -- >> let's vote. there is a motion seconded to approve with questions.

>> could i procure the t.d.r.? >> a small bit of new floor area and for that they will have t.d.r., but they are essentially -- i's because some of the spaces that were considered exempt from floor area are becoming gross floor area because of that torturous definition of gross floor area. >> voting aye. >> commissioner fung. >> aye. >> u a commissioner moore. >> an aye. >> a commissioner richards. >> an aye. >> commissioner koppel. >> aye. >> commissioner president melgar. >> that passes 6-0. commissioners, before we move on to your discretionary review calendar, i am pleased to i an announce that item 20 for 2517 pacific avenue, the d.r.s have been withdrawn that. will place us on your final item as items 18a and 18b have been continued.

item 19, case 2019-01302drp, discretionary. >> the item is a discretionary review and building application which proposes to change the use of an existing market and liquor store to a cannabis retail establishment. on site consumption is not proposed at 50 # o jones street. z it may be add tos future if not and sro units on the upper six floors and that corner market and liquor store existing in the subject tenant space and restaurant in an adjacent ground floor tenant space. it is in the rc-4 and 80t and

130t height and bulk districts. and the existing building is an a rated historic resource listed a z a contributor to a national register historic district. they received seven letters and since packet publication with six letters and 99 petition signatures in support of the application. the d.r. requester was to pro cure in opposition, but none have been obtained. and support for introducing a regulated cannabis market into the neighborhood for persons who rely on it for medical reasons and including support for those recovering from addiction and reference the work the project sponsor has done to ensure the business is a vital and supportive use to the surrounding neighborhood. and in particular, providing a letter of support expressing excitement to work with the proposed cannabis retailer to

fund programming to provide free consultings and sheltered low xhk participants with medical cannabis as a support for a pathway off harmful drugs and providing candidates to the population targeted to the specific needs. among those who oppose the application, three principle concerns have been provided. the first concern is that the surrounding neighborhood is oversaturated with drug sales and this is an, thus, undesirable to add a cannabis store front. and they recognize the struggle thar many san franciscans are experiencing with drug addiction, particularly in the tenderloin, the particular issue is with heroin and methamphetamine, not cannabis. prohibiting a regulated market from establishing in the district only ensures that the black market sales will continue without competition from the regulated market.

the second is the use are w the surrounding context and the concern over the proximity to the use of the san francisco city academy and the adjacent religious institution at 4 450 o'farrell. and located more than 600 and project site verified and the school is an intermittent activity and does not provide k-12 and is likely used while children are accompanied by guardians to the site. additionally, the current plans for reconduction would place the sunday school on the third floor of the site raised away from the subject application. the third principle concern raised is of the tenderloin is lacking access to daily needs retail uses such as corner

markets and that the proposed use would displace an existing market at the site while other large format markets such as trader joe's and whole foods are establishing in the larger area, the loss of the corner market is impactful on the local population. however t project sponsor is a member of the family which has owned and operated the market for decades and indicated to staff that this is a change that was envisioned as an evolution of the business and response to a changing retail environment. i will defer to the applicant to elaborate on that further. copies are available for staff for review and part of the request for discretionary review, the department does not find an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance with the proposed scope of the permit. the presence of black market cannabis sales necessitate support for a regulated market and in a dense, mixed use neighborhood such as the tenderloin. while the department is concerned as a market, it is not

clear that the market would continue to exist if the application is denied. we recommend you not take d.r. and approve the permit as proposed. thank you. >> thank you. do we have project sponsor? presentation? >> this is a d.r., commissioner melgar, so we should hear from the d.r. requester first. >> president melgar, commissioners, my name is ella strong. i am the board president for church of christ scientist. and this site directly adjacent to the cannabis proposed cannabis dispensary. i will speak first and we also have a statement from our developer for 450 o'farrell who will bring new workforce in conjunction with providing the church and new christian science reading room open to the public

in tenderloin community. the applicant has asked to change the use of their current site from convenience market to cannabis retail store. the notice we received said that the planning has determined that the site meets their rules. but if we the neighbors believe that they're exceptional and extraordinary circumstances which exist, that we can present them at this hearing. we strongly believe that such exceptional and extraordinary circumstances do exist. in location. and in this case. tenderloin community district benefit on november 13 and the tenderloin has the highest crime rate in san francisco. 90% of the population is in the fixed income. it is also overcrowded.

in addition to there being 37,000 residents in just 35 square blocks, it houses an extra 6,000 homeless individuals making it 300 times more dense than any other area of the city. reportedly also over 4,000 tenderloin residents are children. homelessness, drug use, open air drug dealing are endemic. violent crimes and property crimes and we have been experiencing both are common, persistent problems. all the conditions are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances. and in an area with such overwhelming, unhandled problem, a lack of consistent public services or law enforcement, in combination with especially vulnerable population, it does not make logical sense to add a recreational drug dispensary. it is contrary to the community's needs.

secondly, there is a degradation of community resources. express market has been a neighborhood convenience store for decades. it provides a variety of items for sale including food and drinks, daily supplies to local residents. displacing a multi-product store with one product, a recreational drug, will have a major impact on the residents in the area. it will eliminate yet another community resource and service and create hardship to those that need it most. this one product, a drug, is highly controversial and not desirable in an area awash with drugs and drug-related problem. the tenderloin police has difficulties dealing with current problems. in fact, they are already spread so thin that they can't handle all the call. we know. we call them. sometimes we receive their assistance only sometimes. the logistics of running such a

business on the corner of jones would be a nightmare for us as next door neighbors. with armed guards at the entrance when deliveries are made, when cash is removed, when customers come and go with pockets full of money or pockets full of drugs, it is a recipe for disaster. not only our church, reading room and sunday school will be impacted but also the senior center across the street and all businesses around. all other locations allow cannabis december penceries in the light industrial areas where they can easily be accessed and not create such a negative impact. 500 jones is just not the right location for this business. please look beyond the zoning laws to the lives of tenderloin residents and that negative impact that their lives will experience. please deny this change of use and let the applicants find a

more suitable location for their business. a different, better suited location would benefit them also. in addition to 99 signature, we have 330 signatures and we will speak to that. also, we have here principal from a nearby school that was referred to. that location 302 eddie street from k-8 children is just a few more feet than 600. >> thank you, ma'am. your time is -- >> thank you, ma'am. your time is up, but you will have a two minute rebuttal. >> do we have any public comment in support of the d.r. requester? if you want to support the d.r. requester, come on up.

if you are here in support of the project sponsor, you will get a chance to speak later. >> the project sponsor is the person who is asking -- >> a correct. are you in support of the d.r. requester? >> yes. >> i am reading a statement on behalf of the forge development partners who are building 300 units of work force housing on the adjacent site also. what they would like to convey is to add their voice to the concerns about the bringing of the facility to the area that already has the problems outlined by ms. strong. forge's main question is how can we be sure and what i an insurance can we receive that the laws around such a facility will be maintained and enforced? >> an any other public comment

support of the d.r. requester? >> i am the assistant administrator at san francisco academy and are a k-12 school and we have not been accredited at this point, but the process is started earlier this year. i am not against dispensaries but how close it is to our 100 students and 302 eddie has 18 kindergarten students in it currently. and we have children all around who are walking back and forth between the park and their classroom at 230 jones and there are a number of children who are in the area with some frequency quite often. we just have concern in regard to the location and number of children that we have around there as well. that is our concern.

>> thank you very much. any other public comment in support of the d.r. requester? >> okay. my name is michael nolte, a community organizer and i am in both positions, because i am neutral, but i have reached out to many aspects of the community to be here today to bring the voices to the meeting. so the green page talks about that report in 213 and the tenderloin has 57. that is a loss of 14 corner stores that already exists. the pink paper will talk about we are not sure if this will

maintain the cigarette sales and are they doing and just eliminating boat or going to be -- well, i don't know that. and then other concerns to surrender the licenses and the community quality of life is improving the area and another is the high injury corridor and the other concern is people who are hurt on jones street as the cars go quickly down the street and the other is that the residing in subsidized housing

and h.u.d., the land lord can evict for illegal drugs which includes medical marijuana. there is a lot of development that received a subsidy, so they cannot purchase from this dispensary without being evicted. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good evening. i we sent an email request 377 and i am not sure if it was received or not. i am sorry about that and we have 377 opposing it. and basically like the voice of the moms and the children and obviously everyone here is an adult and they can talk about hems. and they can't talk about children and youth which is our role as a moms and in community

and the tenderloin is different and has the amen is the and groceries -- amenities and grocery stores. we don't need liquor stores and i work in tenderloin. we have more than 4,000 children in the area. most of the families are very really hardworking families with a lot of kids. and it is like too much for them with the cannabis in the area. and i am sorry to say i got this study about the unintentional marijuana exposure to children in colorado after the marijuana was legalized and tremendous exposure to e.r. visits and unintentional exposure to marijuana and this led to something other than vomiting and all this and one case had a problem that resulted in death.

so this is that a large portion will be the product that is attractive to children and are concerned that this will con consumer marijuana and safer the same effects. >> a hi-next speaker. i work with tenderloin housing and i am concerned that the store will have a negative impact on the community to encourage drug use in an area with an