and we also feel that once they learn about it they will look at this project very disfavorably. so all i want to say is once the hotel is approved and constructed, we will have very positive effect on the 5600 block of mission and it will help revitalize the area and also bring a lot of construction and permanent jobs to the area and will threaten our project as well as revitalization of the area. and i wanted to have my associate here say a few more things. >> my name is christopher and i am an associate of the developers and speaking not in opposition to the concept of a medical cannabis dispensary per se but rather i want to raise two concerns. one is specific and one is procedural. concerning the specific action before you, i urge the commission to require a more thorough investigation with the possibility that certain facilities are within operation of 1,000 feet and the immediate south market area is a rich organization of community organizations and it is our understanding that the filipino youth program is active nearby and we believe it is important for the commission t

under the planning department's own guidelines, there is an entire section called disfavored sides talking specifically about where sal antennas are favorite or not. if an antenna is proposed in a disfavored site, there are four criteria that must be met that are outlined and one of the key ones that has not been met that stands out to me specifically is that team mobil must demonstrate that this is essential to meet demands and the area. -- is that t-mobile must demonstrate this is essential. this is essential to meet demands, i see nothing in the records that supports this. you will be looking at the record that they have met the standard which is outlined in the guidelines of the planning department. by virtue of the failure to show this particular element is alone grounds for appeal. we're talking about your obligations. this is one issue you must consider. >> thank you. >> i live in north beach, three or four blocks from the projected and 10 up. let me say that federal law never stops san francisco and it has awarded and cited by a previous speaker, particularly the marijuana law, the

than the more recent plans which tended to separate land use and planning, to the discredit into disfavor of both. president olague: any additional public comment? >> i want to follow up on what thomas said. the downtown plan has resumed a massive increments, and they also were assuming that most of the growth would have been north of our history. i went through all three rounds as well as eastern neighborhoods. the planning department kicks over the local transit issues and the mta does not follow through. we have not added a massive infrastructure. we're waiting for the solution. we don't have a transit system south of market. they are long walks. it is a long walk to the streets. that is not factored in right now. i can take you down third street. as you go through mission bay, we have the t-line, but no connecting. we do this all the time. it is a wasteland for transit, but whatever was going the walk. it is hard when you are walking uphill with groceries or you are a senior citizen or you have kids. we have done all of these studies for these tiny little segments that are just a tiny

they laid out the standard that if you have a disfavored site, that you or your client needs to demonstrate that it is essential that you be able to be in that particular place. can you go through that analysis? >> absolutely. she is talking about section 8.1 of the guidelines which was written back in 1996. the excess reuse process, those guidelines are generally dealing with the macro sites that were anticipated in 1996. we did not anticipate this use process, the low wattage come micro cell sight. -- site. what we have to show is that we have a gap in service. in residential areas, where you do not have commercial locations, we end up in residential areas. we submitted a comprehensive alternative analysis which is required to show all of the six sites that were not available. that was all part of the planning commission review. this was not part of your review in relation to the ceqa analysis. there would not be any additional environmental study regarding the ceqa exemption that would address that issue. we have addressed that issue. there are maps and drive tests. this is intrusive mea