Neighborhood. Thank you. Commissioner fung. Question for staff. The condition that was proposed by the last speaker it appears some of it is already covered. That is correct. And is there any of those conditions that are not covered . I think there are some conditions that are not covered. In my presentation there are things that i dont think the staff or commission can get involved with. But things to the nature of, we mentioned no, or a prohicks of prohibition of onsite use. The other thing is the kitchen, it could not be permitted not allowed. There are things with the existing tenant which i dont think is an issue the commission would want to be involved with. A fairly private matter. So i made there are some issues where i dont know where permitwise we have full ability to condition ability to enforce or take on the risk of having to enforce. The security fence they are adding will take care of one of the conditions. That will take care of a lot and i think theres some state requirements of things they have to do and i believe the sponsor could provide more information on what their security plans will be and i believe they have a more full, thoughtout security plan that is included in their cannabis application. Do you mind if i interrupt . Can we clarify which conditions we are talking about . Because i think theres two sets if im not mistaken, items we received the six conditions. Those appear to be something that we could enforce but im not. Im referencing the 12 that were in the letter provided within the case report and i actually havent seen what was submitted today. Okay. We should clarify which conditions we are talking about. That would be good. Thank you for that suggestion. So of the six that were passed out today, well, we can look at them more carefully but my initial read is those are things that would be some things that we could enforce and could be included in the conditions of approval. The 12 you are talking about, can be more problematic. Additional six. I explained the number where there may be issues with the city having liability on enforcing these conditions. My question was related to the six that was just. I might clarify. Yes come on up. The original 12 conditions did contain some conditions that we felt were not appropriate to go into the cua. So the list that we had today were conditions we felt could go in so its a subset of the 12. Okay. Thank you. Perhaps the project sponsor, do you want to respond to those six . Thank you, commissioner fung. Im familiar with the list of 12. This is the first time im seeing the list of six. And i dont see anything on this list that we would find objectionable. Okay. Okay. Commissioner koppel. Ill make a motion to approve with the six conditions handed in in writing by the dtna. Second. Does the City Attorney wish to Say Something . Planning commission, southwest team leader. We can restrict onsite consumption. And there is concern also about the signage. We cant prohibit them to be more restrictive than what our sign code will allow. Go ahead. President melgar, kate stacey from the City Attorneys office. I just was raising concern about condition number two as being a contentbased restriction on signage. That is quite difficult for the city to enforce in certain circumstances. I understand that the project sponsor is willing to agree to this so just maybe some future issues with enforcing that. We do have signage restrictions that regulate the time, place and manner of signage but not necessarily the content. So i have a little bit of concern about condition number two and the citys ability to enforce it in the future. Okay. Will the motion maker want to amend that . Sure. Why dont i take out condition two and then add in the look back. I second it. It was okay. Commissioner fung. I think the project sponsor heard the suggestion and is probably aware of what they need to do with respect to condition number two. Commissioners if theres nothing further there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this meater with matter with conditions. Eliminateing number two on that motion commissioner fung . Aye. Johnson. Koppel. Aye. Melgar. Aye. So moved that motion passes unanimously four to zero. cheering. . We still have business so if you could dial it down i would appreciate it, and quietly exit. I will place this under your discretionary review calendar. 1299 sanchez street. If those persons leaving the chambers could do so quietly, we would certainly appreciate that. [off mic]. Ill bring you some in a second. Southwest team leader. Good afternoon. Folks if we could keep it down, please. We still have business. Thank you. The case before you is a request for discretionary review of a Building Permit proposing to change the use of an approximately 1139 square foot tenant space to add a twostory mixed use building and transition into a limited restaurant noe Valley Coffee, with an accessory Coffee Roaster, minor alterations proposed for the subject tenant space. The property is located on the east side of sanchez street between clipper and 26th street another the noe valley neighborhood. The requester is paul who resides 416 26th street which is 150 feet west of the subject property sight. The request concerns are as follows. That the impact of the proposed business to the livability of the neighborhood due to the emissions an increase in Traffic Congestion and noise level. Potential Health Risks Due to the release of air pollutants in association with coffee roasting and the lack of active monitoring of the air Quality Management. To ensure compliance with their regulations and conditions. The compatibility of the Zoning District and the elimination of laundromat. To date the department received five correspondence in opposition to the project that are in support of the dr request. Members of the public expressing opposition to the project state concerns with compatibility of the proposed land use and potential emissions and noxious odors. To date the department has received 48 correspondents in support of the project and in opposition to the dr. Members of the public express support state the project stresses the commercial corridor. Provided to you are four correspondents received after the packet. And the Department Recommends the commission not take dr since this is a principally nc1 district. So this is a notification for change of use and it meets the goals and objectives of our general plan. An item by item response provided in the packet ensures this project will not displace the laundromat and provide a use compatible with the neighborhood, not present a Significant Health risk to the neighborhood and as identified by the bay area air Quality Management. That concludes my presentation. Thank you mr. Washington. We will hear now from the requester. Good afternoon. My name is paul. Im a physician with usff and San Francisco va. Im a scientist at those locations. I live within 150 feet of the proposed change of use. And im here representing not only myself but a number of neighbors who are very concerned about this change. And our main concerns are the hazards produced by coffee roasting onsite. And we believe if these hazards are addressed adequately we would accept all the other aspects of the change of use. So coffee roasting may sound harmless, but its really an industrial process that produces significant air pollution, containing carcinogens and toxic chemicals that can worsen lung diseases such as asthma or emphysema. This is the highest concern the health of children, such as those at the nearby preschool just down the block because of the youth, they are most susceptible to these effects. We are also concerned because the calculations of the air Quality Management district estimated that roasting coffee would produce carcinogens at levels that are really past the limits of safety. Moreover from a quality of life aspect, roasting is harmful because it produces noxious odors that have been described like burning tires, for example. And these are common causes of complaints. So we believe that there are two possible solutions that would address these hazards. First, he could replace his proposed technology called the vortex, the Spear Technology and that is the use of afterburners. Afterburners are widely used as the best Available Technology. And thats in fact how they are steamed by the air Quality Management district. These afterburners will effectively remove all carcinogens and odors. And this is the dominant Technology Used in San Francisco. I cant find any other Technology Used on record. I would also note that all the roasters that he lists as operating near schools use afterburners. Another sign of their wide acceptance. In contrast the equipment that he wants to use is not certified by air management district as having efficacy against carcinogens or odors nor does the manufacturer of this equipment claim that equipment eliminates these problems. It is an unproven and inferior technology and quite likely inadequate for abatement. During our mediation with him we discussed the use of afterburners but he rejected this. We also suggested they use an afterburner roaster unit that has zero emissions but that was rejected. So a second possibility that weve proposed that he could continue roasting as he is currently doing in berkeley. They have an extensive range of roasters including several that can do sample roasting, which is one of his goals, which was also rejected. So in conclusion, i think we have made a goodfaith effort to resolve this dispute. We have provided several solutions at mediation and afterwards, we provided mr. Rooter with the Regulatory Information that he requested. In contrast, he did not fulfill the action items listed in our mediation agreement. Nevertheless we believe we can resolve this dispute if mr. Rooter uses afterburners or if he roasts at another site such as his current location. These solutions allow him to operate the expanded cafe at sanchez street, he could fulfill all his Business Needs by simply roasting off site. While still protecting the health and quality of life of the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you very much. We will now take Public Comment in support of the dr requester. So if you are here supporting the dr request come on up now. Good afternoon. Im elenore. I was the parent of a very sweet preschooler at the academy across the street for the last three years and i planned to enroll my younger child next fall. I speak on behalf of the owner and director of academy, the cafe and heidi who submitted two letters expressing concerns over the Health Effects of the roaster on the preschool children across the street. The doctor said there was a path of success for all parties. We do not oppose the change of use to a limited restaurant but we do oppose the use of the roaster. Number one, install the best Available Technology to abate the health risks which is an afterburner or number two continue to roast at coroast. The section prohibits. This is overwhelmingly residential with a few nearby businesses generating low foot traffic. Adding a new source of pollution for so many Young Children is specifically problematic. As pediatrician and nearby resident writes to you children face special risks from air pollution as compared to adults. She explains children have increased metabolic rates and must develop 80 percent of their lung capacity after birth. She cites a number of studies that show a small incremental changes in pollution are associated with measurable changes in mortality rates and life expectancy. In addition to higher rates of asthma and otherless practice pyroproblems. Other problems. They argue other roasters dont abate their smoke or locate it near preschools. We contacted the roasters and reviewed their permits and found their claims were inaccurate. They say they have a roaster in a residential area but it no longer operates this roaster and it appears it never applied for the necessary air permits. Andy roaster is in a residential section but uses an integrated afterburner. We agreed but they declined to sign a binding agreement with us in mediation. The air district confirmed they would need to apply for a new permit to increase their capacity to just under the levels and they must grant that permit. Our concerns are both the immediate and Long Term Health risks over the Young Children across the street who should not have their health risked so they may offer a novel coffee experience. This is not neighborhood serving. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. My name is james moon. Im a senior Vehicle Systems engineer for Bay Area Rapid transit. Ive lived with my family at 1280 sanchez street across the street from the proposed noe Valley Coffee for 25 years. My wife and i do not want the terrible odor of roasting coffee wafting over the neighborhood. We are concerned about potential health risks of coffee roasting, especially the sensitive people like the children at the preschool down the street and those with asthma like my wife and other neighbors. We believe that coffee roasting is an industrial activity that is not suitable for this residential neighborhood. We are concerned that the only monitoring proposed by the bay area air Quality Management district is indirect. Coffee being purchased reporting which is unlikely to be or difficult to separate from the wholesale Coffee Business and the natural gas usage. Theres no monitoring of the actual pollutants. We are also concerned there appears to be an exemption to the noxious odor regulation of the area, bay area air Quality Management district for restaurants with less than five employees. So we feel we may have no recourse if there are noxious odors from the coffee roasting. The best Available Technology for mitigating emissions and odor from Coffee Roasters is the use of an afterburner and was stated previously, noe Valley Coffee refused to use that technology. We are not opposed to the proposed change of use for the coffee shop limited use restaurant but we are opposed to the operation of a roaster in this neighborhood without the use of an afterburner. We respect entrepreneurial spirit but believe that the desire to create a Business Opportunity should not come at the expense of the community. Thank you. Thank you sir. Next speaker please. Good afternoon. My name is kathleen maxwell. Im a professor at Santa Clara University and the spouse of paul. We have lived within 150 feet of it proposed roaster installation for the past 34 years. I support the right to open a cafe, it is the partner of Christian Ritter in this enterprise. I do not support mr. Ritters right to install a roaster that may compromise the environment of our residential neighborhood. I ask you to remember there is a significant difference between roasting coffee beans and brewing coffee. Both create odors but roasting coffee has a particular machine proposed by mr. Ritter may welcome promise the air quality of our residential neighborhood. We cannot allow our affection for it to cloud our judgment regarding the potential impact of the particular roaster that Christian Ritter wishes to install. Our neighborhood is filled now with young families. Furthermore a preschool is located in the church across the street. The childrens play yard there opens to sanchez street. I can only hope that the neighborhood children and those attending the preschool will be able to enjoy the same healthy environment that our three children did. Christian ritter has viable alternatives to the roaster he proposes to install in the cafe. Mr. Ritter could continue to roast at corow coffee in berkeley. They have many different types and capacities of roasters including small batch roasters. Mr. Ritter could purchase a safe roaster with zero emissions. Mr. Ritter could install a small batch roaster which would meet his declared needs regarding onsite roasting at the cafe, a small batch roaster would qualify him to remain legally below the radar of the air Quality Management board making this Design Review unnecessary. Mr. Ritter instead wishes to install a large capacity roaster which can process 44 pounds of beans we are hour. Despite his claims that he will only use it for a few hours a week. His roaster could easily exceed safe levels of harmful chemicals. Given the fact that mr. Ritters coffee is already sold in the bay area and packaging that claims it is roasted in the city of San Francisco and given the fact that there will be no effective oversight by any agency of mr. Ritters coffee roasting once his roaster is installed i strongly object to his being granted permission to install this high capacity roaster in our residential neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker please. Good afternoon. Ive lived in noe valley for 31 years and have been in my current home at 26th street approximately 190 feet from the proposed coffee shop at 1299. Ive been there for 28 years. Ive been a supporter of spin city now doing business as noe Valley Coffee company and the enterprise since they began serving coffee at the sanchez street location but i oppose the accessory coffee roasting provision. Most of us who are coffee drinkers enjoy the smell of coffee brewing but its important to point out that brewing and roasting coffee are very different. Coffee roasting produces a very unpleasant burnt smell. More importantly it produces toxic emissions that include formaldehyde of which either in any quality are known carcinogens and unacceptable. In mediation christian of noe Valley Coffee company stated he currently roasts his commercial batches at corow roasting coop in an Industrial Area of berkeley and that he continues to do so. He intends to continue to do so. We have contacted corow and theyve told us they facilitate large and small batch roasting, specifically the sample roasting proposed for 1299 sanchez street. I propose to you that theres no need or reason to allow accessory roasting at 1299 sanchez street at all since noe Valley CoffeeCompany Already utilizes the facility that meets their current and future proposed needs. Therefore there is no need for noe Valley Coffee company to introduce factors which could impact livability, direct wording from planning code 710, to be clear im not opposing noe Valley Coffee companys extension plans expansion plans for a limited restaurant use. But i emphatically oppose the coffee roasting provision. I request that in your consideration of Health Concerns and quality of life for the immediate neighborhood, the commission does not allow any coffee roasting at 1299 sanchez street. Thank you. Thank you. Any other Public Comment in support of the requester. Thank you. My name is stan. I lived in San Francisco for 29 years and at the location of 3980, 26th street for 14 years. This is just two doors now from this building. And im going to say that we are opposed to the roasting of coffee and dont believe such an industrial process belongs in the urban area that you see in our neighborhood. If you dont mind i would like to bring up a schematic just one slide, please. Right. So what you see here is the aerial of the building itself. Sorry theres an x where the stack would be located based on the drawings that i have. And you see there the direction the winds blow based on we see how it comes in from the ocean. That green circle is my property. And thats a deck that we have in our rooftop. With my family of three myself, my daughter emma and my wife and you can see the second image i took that this morning, that shows again the x where the stack would be located. And so we get a family of three. In our building theres another family of flee below us who has a child who is two years old. The lower unit has a family of four with two children aged ten and 12. The building between us has a child who is 12 years old attending and the building east of us has three Young Children, age one year to four years. We are all directly downwind from this activity. So as you can imagine, we are very opposed to it. And been there for 14 years. Do not intend to reject the coffee shop idea. We are fine with that. But just the roasting itself. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you very much. Any other Public Comment in support of the dr requester . Okay. We will now hear from the project sponsor. Sorry about that. Im just getting this. Thank you very much for having us. Im here to present our case for the change of use at 1299 sanchez. We initially applied for our permit as you can see in late 2018. The bay area air Quality Management district provided their preliminary approval in june of 2018. So its been a number of months now that we are trying to get this process completed. So we did go to the Community Boards for mediation. And as a result of the mediation we agreed to reduce our roasting by 62 percent. And you can see the quote from alex from the bay area Quality Management district saying that noe Valley Coffee agreed to reduce the output. So we absolutely did come to the table and make a significant agreement to the other parties about our roasting. And we also provided the Health Hazard review documents, including the Third Party Test that were included in our submission. All that information is in the packet. In reference to formaldehyde, et cetera, because the company that we use they did have all these Third Party Tests done, which we included. The dr requester sorry the dr requester, they did not actually propose any alternatives to the project as you can see in the application. It says rather they suggested to flat out deny the project altogether. As you can see from the proposed plan, the roastery operating a very small area of the total space around 8 percent of the total square footage. Please take a look at the chart on the left if you can. Its a little small but it shows noe Valley Coffee, the bottom left, as a five kilogram roaster. This is the smallest roaster that the bay area air Quality Management district has ever permitted. So to talk about the scale of the roaster, you can see other familiar names out there and the size of their roasting capabilities. The chart on the right indicates the amount of coffee we are authorized to roast. So sort of blocking it but its half the amount of the second largest roaster. This picture indicates the smoke abatement unit on the left. Its made in santa rosa, california. Its a water atomizer abater. Some graphics on the left hand side, the beans are roasting in the chamber thats indicated with orange. The smoke then travels inside of the smoke abatement unit. And the water atomized component of the roaster sorry, of the vortex removes the particulates. We plan to roast for the cafe only. I know theres some concern about the wholesale operation. We will only roast for the cafe exactly like some of our friends in the industry do. Sight glass on 20th street was mentioned. They have an identicalsized roaster which is five kilograms with no abatement unit, so direct venting. And just so you know, the preschool is 600 feet away with 262 preschoolers. The requester brought up the fact that the roaster has a capability to roast up to 44 pounds an hour. Thats absolutely true. However, we are significantly limited by the bay area air Quality Management district. And they absolutely do have capabilities for people of the public to submitt complaints. Okay. Thank you. You will get a twominute rebuttal after, okay . Thank you. Do we have anyone here who wishes to speak in support of the project sponsor . Come up now please. Good afternoon. Thank you, chairman melgar and commissioners. Thank you for having us. I am tracy bird. I used to live in noe valley and ive been going to sin city cafe since my son was born. This is an amazing space. Its where people go to heal. It shares an Amazing Energy and spirit. Its an incredible resource for the community. And we actually met about 30 years ago. She was born and raised in San Francisco and im sure we spent a lot of time in cafe floor together in our youth because we came out together and we came out together in the castro. So it felt very appropriate that we came right after cafe floor. So i think in the interest of supporting Small Business, San Francisco local businesses, supporting this amazing space for children and there are always children there. My son stopped by this morning to give her a hug because i told them this was happening today. And it seems to me the concerns have been addressed. And i know your job is to decide whether those concerns have been addressed but i really wanted to speak to what an amazing space that is and how important it is for the community and its especially important, its especially important right now. We are in difficult times where people are under stress politically and its important we create these healing spaces and support Small Businesses when we have the opportunity to do so. So thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Next speaker please. Hello commissioners, thank you for having me. Im a resident on the street in noe valley. Ill submit my letter to the record but based on some of the things im hearing im going to go off script a little bit. The first point i would like to make is i really have appreciated noe Valley Coffee and mary carrs spirit of entrepreneurship and i was thrilled to see the permit on her window to expand this business. I can go on and on about the struggles of 21st street but im sure you are well aware. What i would like to address is some of the opposition ive heard. I guess my opinion is, one i work for Public Health and i worked for a long time in emeryville, very close to a Coffee Roaster and you wouldnt have known it. Until a couple years in i walked by and realized it was one i had no idea. There was no noxious smell. As a Public Health professional i would be worried about particulates in our community, in our neighborhood impacting a preschool down the street. However, i think in support of the application i have to understand that a they are going to abide by the things they are saying their going to do, b that the regulatory board we have to supervise air quality if they are meeting the regulations i feel like i need to support that. And c, i think that there is a fine line between supporting a Small Business and dictating what somebody can do inside that. So i feel like if the solution proposed is meeting all the regulations, then we need to be very careful about what may happen and what could happen when you dont really know whats going to happen and if the regulatory board such as air quality board are saying that these are the levels and you stay within them, i think its tough to take a fear of what may happen and put that on a business application. So those are just my comments. I definitely support the expansion of this business. Im happy to see it in this large space. It was very empty and i was also concerned about activity there so im happy to see a business coming in to our vibrant neighborhood that supports noe valley. Thank you. Next speaker please. Good afternoon commissioners. Thank you for allowing me to speak here. My name is kathleen price. And i live at 1291 sanchez street. So i am immediately next door to the project site. Our walls touch. When i wasnt quite sure there was such a significant opposition for health reasons. I have significant chronic sinusitis and when this was first proposed i actually looked at all the drawings and started investigating them. Im a licensed mechanical engineer. And at that time, i felt very confident that there wasnt going to be a problem. This is off script. I hadnt intended to say this. What i did intend to say is that this institution has been, what shes done is shes created a real neighborhood here. Ive lived there since 1985 same house. And in the last couple of years when shes been there ive met more neighbors people have been in business like mr. Claire at the shop for over 30 years. And its become a meeting place. Its just its a part of the neighborhood. And i think its really important that we support these Small Businesses. And its one thing i know how much they struggle to come here and do it. And i really hope that you consider their application and support it. I am still 100 percent in favor of it. Thank you for allowing me to speak. Thank you. Next speaker please. Good afternoon commissioners. Thank you for having me. My name is maya. I am in favor of spin city change of business and the roaster. By trade im a researcher. And i actually innovation and change. One of the hardest things when you leave change is to explain new concepts and translate new technologies and complex ideas to simple daily use. And i feel im kind of also going off the script considering that its 5 00 and weve been a long time here. What i really ask you to do is to review the technology that is being used in the roaster and compare to the other roasters in the city who are operating without a permit. Pin city is an example of how Small Businesses are changing the city and are at the core of the city of San Francisco with collaborations are actually coming in, installing bigger roasters without a permit, and because they have bigger budgets, covered with corporations, they would rather pay penalties than going through this process. This is ecofriendly and really we have a community, we are actually together meet and reviewed and we all in agreement not just myself but also my husband the technology is not harmful. And the anxiety should be really eased by explaining the fact versus just hiding a concept of something that may be harmful. Im in favor of both. Next speaker please. Thank you. My name is camille wood. I have lived in San Francisco for 19 years. I founded a film studio here in San Francisco. And i currently employ five full time employees. Ive also studied neuroscience at duke university. Earlier bidses like her majestys secret beekeeper in the Mission District nonprofit i also teach bee keeping and have a nonprofit called sfb. Im ayer for a nonprofit bar and cafe in fort mason. I moved here in 2002 and i moved to noe valley four years ago where i became a regular customer at spin city. I am here in support of the Building Permit application that will allow noe Valley Coffee spin city to expand beyond their current 85 square feet and be allowed a new accessory Coffee Roaster. Although there are a few other coffee shops the unique Personality Community support and excellent coffee have assured this is the only coffee shop i frequent in my neighborhood on a daily basis. Every time i walk in, she introduces me to someone else in the cafe with whom i have something in common and as a result i have many friends in this room today. They have hosted events that support our community and have added to the vitality and enrichment of our neighborhood. Although ive only lived here since 2015 i have multitudes of friendships with my neighborhoods primarily because of the coffee shops inclusivity and community. With regard to the roaster and air quality concerns i have studied the model and its abatement and use schedule. And i have absolutely no concerns about air quality or pollution. I have insisted in keeping the use of their original Coffee Roaster that was previously installed and im familiar with the roasters exhaust. Similar systems have been installed in shops throughout San Francisco in similar neighborhoods surrounded by schools with few to no reported problems. The air filter are best in class with few emissions. Im going to skip that because you dont care about traffic. The vast majority of my neighbors and friends, we walk to this coffee shop, and we love it. Its an important part of our lives. I urge you to embrace urban living, neighborhood community, living in close proximity to neighbors with different businesses and interests and their ideas and i encourage businesses in our backyards. Thank you for your consideration. I encourage the board to approve this plan as i believe this will prove to be a substantial improvement to our neighborhood. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker please. Good afternoon. My name is barbara. And im one of the moms in the neighborhood that the opponents talk about. I have two children that have been in noe valley for 20 years. Both of my kids go to school in noe valley. They walk by there every day. First of all its a community place, i think we all got that message. But one thing that really makes me think is about the pollution they mentioned and i dont know if youve ever gone to any town, im a regular customer there. You dont you barely smell something. I would not go in there with my kid if i would be like, oh, my gosh, i think i have to worry here. I have cars that, like, blast poison in my face. So im like the last thing im worried about is the roaster. And im talking for a place i grew up in switzerland. Tell me which country has better air. Hello. Tell me about air. I know whats good air. And you know what . You dont get it anywhere in San Francisco. So seriously for me as a mother of two kids in noe valley, someone is telling me they are worried about the roaster air pollution, ask my daughter thats 13 probably the number one thing shes worried about pollution and shes very into it. She would mention the cars. Cars arent even allowed in switzerland because they pollute the air. And here i guess its okay, its fine, its no surprise sometimes. But im just saying our family, and i know a lot of moms with kids in noe valley, they support this project. We would be very happy to have it and i dont have to go to valencia street anymore. I have my roaster in the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you commissioners for the opportunity to comment on this. Im speaking on behalf of the owners of the building across the street, the architecture and medical office building. Theyve asked me to come and make comments. And im very happy to on this behalf because ive been involved in many cases very much like this. And hearing the arguments about fumes and noxious gases its just a bunch of hooey. It just isnt that way. I got valencia street, for ritual coffee chicken john and all these business uses earlier today. They now have 90 employees and i think they are opening their fifth coffee shop or sixth coffee shop. They started roasting on valencia street without a scrubber. After four years, they were over capacity for that location. So they no longer roast there. Before they opened, they had neighbors commenting very much like this, concerned about noxious fumes. And the commission instructed the neighbors that if there are complaints we will respond the Planning Department will support any investigations violations of Community Standards if theres a nuisance. The very same people who were there complaining prior to the opening became regulars of ritual coffee and are probably drinking ritual to this day. Similar things happened up in coal valley with bacon bacon. People were saying they are going to be making bacon, we are going to smell bacon. We added an additional four feet to the stack for the fumes to be removed. No more problems with bacon fumes. As a favorite commissioner of mine who used to sit on the board of appeals once commented that there are these little neighborhood amenities that make our community special. And this is one of those neighborhood amenities. And i would urge you to support this roaster on sanchez street, this is exactly the kind of thing that makes San Francisco such a great place to live. Thank you. Are there any other Public Comments in support of the project sponsor . Okay. With that, dr requester you get a twominute rebuttal. So first let me emphasize mr. Ritters Business Plan can be fulfilled 100 percent, can provide the experience, whatever the nuances without roasting onsite. Second, you have heard about these other roasters that seem to be well tolerated by the community. As far as i can tell, they all use afterburners. And i have the documentation here. Now sight glass has been mentioned and debated. And i can give you an email from mr. Gerard cofounder saying there is no roasting on 20th street. Point being theres nothing going on theres nothing to complain about. So i think that these examples of happy cohabitation, largely the use of afterburners. Yes the air quality board approves very small roasters without abatement but they have onethird roasting capacity of what is proposed going in. So roasters are either tiny or out of compliance. If they are not using an afterburner. And just because you have not using afterburners and out of compliance, that just tells you the air quality board cant really police these things very well. Now with regard to technology, i am a scientist. I have five years of funding for my research. And i can understand the concepts here. With the water scrubber is an inferior technology that the manufacturer makes no claims about for abatement of these carcinogens. So. Anything else . I dont believe the public complaint process would be adequate if there are concerns over the emissions. Because i cant smell formal formaldehyde. They are difficult to detect by the public. Can i add . Sorry your time is up. But the project sponsor gets a two minute rebuttal. I have just a couple more slides. So when we started this, it was 45 but it went up to 48. I think that really speaks volumes. You heard all the people come up here. We have some of the best neighbors around. Many with small children including myself. I have a threeyearold and a sevenyearold, and the last thing i would want to do is create any type of environment that would put any children in harm. This is my last slide. I want to reiterate that the bay area Quality Management has thoroughly looked at this, actually did a Health Risk Assessment. The only other Coffee Roaster in the past five years that has had a Health Risk Assessment is petes coffee in oakland, which is a massive commercial roastry. So a lot of scrutiny has come down on our small roaster, and everybody that has looked at it has given it unanimous approval based on the conditions. Its ceqa approved, the Public Notice went out. So with that i just want to say thank you for your consideration. Thank you very much. Commissioner koppel. Question for sponsor. I have a couple comments that will lead me to my question. Ive been playing guitar at this small studio down on south market between ninth and tenth and harrison and brannen. I never knew what i was smelling when i walked down there. Its an odor so pungent and strong its literally almost physically offensive and i never knew what it was but i found out it was a coffee roasting. So im not familiar with these types of equipments. But im curious it seems like the only opposition anyone has is they would want you to use a certain roaster. Why wont you use that roaster . We actually are using a very small roaster with an advanced smoke abatement device to what you may have been smelling downtown is numerous Coffee Roasters just like sight glass on 20th who just recently has stopped roasting at that site. So theyve had that roaster installed for ten years. With no smoke abatement so im assuming what you smelled downtown could have been a largescale roaster with no smoke abatement. Its all about the smoke abatement. You have to have the smoke travel into the unit and be dissipated. Is there a specific reason you wont use the roaster . We are using the best available controlled technology. So its considered by the air Quality Management district so we are, in our opinion using an advanced smoke abatement unit. I see you are following the letter of the law but i dont know if its the spirit of what the neighbors are looking for. Is it a considerable massive cost difference . I dont see why youre just not going to agree to use that specific roaster and we are done with it. Well, we have already gone down the road of all of our permitting, you know, like i said, we have the air Quality Management look at our vortex, we purchased our equipment almost two years ago. So when we purchased the equipment, it was the best available controlled technology. Okay. Commissioner fung. I guess that was my question too. Instead of using the term coffee, but you know, the opposition using the term afterburner. Theyre both smoke abatement types. So one is a water atomizer and one is a thermal oxidizer. Two types of abatement. Does that also reduce smell . They both do. They both do . Absolutely. Yeah, like, for example the place in berkeley that they keep referencing corow, they have a five kilo roaster abated by a vortex. And they have never received one complaint. And ive actually personally stood above the stack at full second crack. And theres zero odor. And i have a letter from the. Question for staff along those same lines is what do you know about smoke abatement . I put a ton of information in the packet. Sorry. Southwest team leader, that question directed to me or staff. We have limited knowledge. Our staff did do some