report. i appreciate the effort of the staff, being willing to meet with us. the use standard outdoor ground floor activities. this is not a standard ground floor activity. it is fifth floor in the larger neighborhood context i have showed you. the door is wide open for this picture of increasing sound from now. from here to infinity, here we go. residents are already using earplugs and cannot sleep with windows open during warm weather, the peak season in restaurants for outdoor use. when the burden is on, having

the residents in force puts a burden on neighbors to volunteer. this does not protect the community. short of denying this, what can we live with? and for all the arguments we have told you, we do not think a cu is legal, desirable, or compatible. we have gone through an exercise, 18 conditions we would like to be the starting point. the president is exhibit o -- precedent is exhibit o. if we have to be there, we have to work with mr. murad, but we think you should uphold your own

policies and the eastern neighborhood plan. >> the last 19 seconds -- this is his property as well. the new mission theater. he is planning on having a large nightclub there. it is not as though he is deprived of everything. he has a restaurant here and a big nightclub there. >> if people want to stand up to show their support or have their two minutes. -- president olague: >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am one of the merchants and a resident of the mission district since 1963.

i know that area pretty well. i know the parking lot that used to be in the back of their behind the mission. we shop on mission street between 22nd and 23rd. i have seen the changes over the years, what has been there and what got destroyed with the construction. it is finally coming back. it is important to keep that in perspective over the future. mission street is a commercial corridor. it rivaled market street for a lot of years. there is more that will be coming down in the future and things have to be more final to have the larger businesses work. i am in full support of medjool. i think it will bring a lot more income to the neighborhood and the city.

i think it is important to support these types of businesses in san francisco. there are a lot of -- not a lot of businesses that work with nonprofits in the area. it is important for us to encourage more and to work something out between the businesses and residents. it is time for this to move forward. >> good evening, commissioners. i have not been here for a long time. i forgot how to speak. but bear with me. i am here and supporting medjool

because it is a great access to our community. i am a longtime resident and worked in the mission my entire life. i think it is good for us to have big business in our community, and especially on mission street. this is helpful to our community, the nonprofit, and other people. he has let us have fund-raisers in his place and does not charge us anything. tell us where in san francisco you can go get a fund-raiser and not have to pay any money. he has been very helpful to the residence. he has one of the largest businesses to my knowledge on mission street. i think the mission needs good business. he is a very good business person.

i support him 100%. i am happy and pleased if you were to approve the permit. thank you very much. >> i am a 20 year resident of san francisco. i commend you on commiting your time and energy to this important commission, designed to enhance the san francisco i love. there are serious and complex issues. this mission is -- this business is lazy, careless, and devious. they served mediterranean dishes in an evocative setting.

they of our community minded. they are not such problems. there are undesirable developments in san francisco. the rooftop deck of medjool is not an issue. you have done your due diligence as the planning commission. let this be an example of a small businessman hoping to enhance san francisco, eager to respond to neighborhood concerns. he goes above and beyond requirements, installing sound barriers, monitoring music, reducing square footage, trimming service, and adjusting his own vision. the planning commission finally and enthusiastically approved his the the application. put this aside. grant the application and move on to more pressing matters.

thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am usually here speaking about traffic safety issues on behalf of the san francisco bicycle coalition. and today, i am here as a neighbor. i am happy to be speaking for the vitality, livability, and diversity of the mission. i am proud to have lived in the mission for 15 years. i am a recent never on bartlett street. my house backs up to medjool. we're the closest neighbor. i love the mission because it is vibrant and perverse. i love that i live next to people of all ages, shapes, and sizes. i love that i can live without a

car. i can buy it and take transit. i love the cultural opportunities. i love the businesses. i love the restaurants and bars. my partner and i moved from the permission into this corridor because we wanted more social life, and we eat out all the time and stay out life. what i do not like is what has been done to some of our neighbors on the street. it has driven away some of my neighbors in the building. there has been disrespectful and illegal activity, noise coming from the rooftop deck. even with the sound barrier that was added, i hear noise at

night of music, of voices, of dishes, of a huge fan that goes 24/7 -- i am not sure why. i am one of the people that sleeps with earplugs and windows closed. even though it is really warm. i am asking you to deny this and work with the neighbors. >> there is a problem with the bell. it is hard to hear. >> i am sorry. thank you for your time on this. >> my name is paul wermer. although i am not a new neighbor of -- near neighbor, i am concerned about two issues. one is the noise. the noise ordinance specifically regulates -- it does not look at

individuals dining and talking. that can get loud. we have a weakness in the way noises considered. i am -- noise is considered. i am more concerned about a major revision of the planning code and planning code intent by permitting commercial uses on rooftops. if we are setting the rooftop is not a story, that opens opportunities for rooftop businesses in all sorts of businesses -- sorts of districts. there are lots of ways to game the system on this. it may well be that rooftop activity is appropriate. if that is the case, it really should be accompanied by some careful assessments of what the codes should be, what the

controls should be, and what are or are not appropriate accessory uses. the idea that a business can move up in the building as accessory uses is bewildering to me. it is not what i interpret as i read the planning code for the district where i have been involved in projects. this is potentially a bad precedent if this is approved. thank you. >> thanks for your time. my name is ted's prosser -- ted stosser. i love roof of bars. i just got back from amsterdam. the city -- they are a city that figured out how to get that right. what noise do you monitor? is it talking, ambient noise? how do you address safety? i would love for san francisco

to do that. i would love for that to be successful. we have not done that. our process to approach this problem has been reactive. this is illegal. we are nowhere near a good process. we do not have a standard. the recommendation for you is also know where. it does not deal with enforcement. it puts the problems on the neighbors. what we are dealing with is the worst-case scenario, a situation where a connected individual broke rules and wants special treatment, and is getting that special treatment. he has done a lot for a lot of groups. you will see a lot of people speaking on his behalf. the point is, there is a problem to be solved. we need to work with the neighbors. but when you take a step back, if five months from now we have one work top bar, we have not

done the city a favor. what about the other rooftops? we had a chance to address this two years ago. two years ago, this body said that was illegal. the neighborhood that lives there, i can tell you -- the ambient noise problem will grow. there is a fan that is louder than any other fan on the block. take the lack of standards, 120 people up there. when this property was redeveloped as a restaurant with a common area on the top, it was not contemplated it would include all the patrons on the top plus all the folks on the building. if the fire happened in 2003 with people on the roof, imagine what would have happened. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i own and run a small business in the mission.

i live a few blocks away from medjool. i've been involved with the buddhist center for almost that long, taking classes. i meditate there. my wife and i were married there seven years ago. our 3-year-old daughter had her naming ceremony there. the buddhist center for many years has graciously offered for free for it to be a pickup location for the eat well farms cooperative. people who live in the community who are members of the cooperative, every week to pick up fruit and veggie boxes. my wife and i manage that at the buddhist center. after the pickup, the buddhist center offers free introductory meditation class is. i see people come through the doors every week and get introduced to meditation. the buddhist center offers a lot

of the new to me and my family, and i believe too many members of the community as well. if a rooftop bar is permitted, i believe that will jeopardize the existence of the buddhist center. there is no way a rooftop bar is not one to create a huge amount of noise with 300 people. drinking, music -- it is outside. there is no way that sound is going to be mitigated. people live there. there is no way it is fair to ask those people to put up with all that noise. i hope you do the right thing to date and deny the application. thank you. president olague: we have more speaker cards. randal cord, richard brent, apollo, muhammad djosney.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i am a bay area native. i am also an employee of the restaurant. i am speaking in favor of the proposed rooftop deck. medjool has contributed an immense amount to the community. we are a big family. it is a destination for diners locally in this community and in other parts of the bay area. the city husks -- has to ask how to bring people to the city, keep them entertained, and keep them coming back. the restaurant contributes to the community, which as you mentioned before has had a serious image problem. they contribute safely to

increasingly business in the area, the safety of patrons, and the economic prosperity of that area. i hope you all take that into consideration and allow support of this project. neighbors have to learn how to coexist, remove the politics and personalities, and address the problem. the mission area has an image problem, and we need to solve that. thank you. >> good afternoon and thank you for your time. i have been across the street from the property for the past 16 years. i am in full support of it. i have seen it prior to and after the rooftop. being directly across the street from it, there is noise, but not enough to bother me.

if i want to be quiet, i leave the city. we need the business. it brings economic vitality to the area. in turn, there is much needed revenue for our city, as you know. we have cleaned the streets, we have graffiti abatement, local security, and closed -- excuse me. closed-circuit tv. please pass this particular item. thank you. >> good afternoon. i have lived in san francisco since 1970. this is a big asset to the neighborhood.

they have attracted more competition, believe it or not. the help the non-profit organization. i have been to the restaurant at the mezzanine and the rooftop. i do not know about this noise. i can see any of these things. i think they should be granted the permit, after your review. they support the employees. they have a very good relationship with their employees and workers. thank you for your time. president olague: [reads names]

>> my name is dawn, and i have been living in the mission for the last 10 years. i wish to speak about the noise impact from the rooftop bar. i have a summary of police department calls from their address when the rooftop was operating. there was a spike of police reports during this time, which shows the incompatibility with the residential neighbors. this is further supported by the parcel map and conversations with neighbors. to summarize, there have been 28 calls made to the police to complain about the noise coming from medjool. the record established the operated in such a way to increase disturbances to residents with regards to noise. the planning commission should use the standard from section 3,

which states incidental noise, i e patrons, should not be audible beyond the premises. the police allowed up a disturbance above ambient levels. please take into consideration the cumulative impact. this approach is mandated by ceqa. thank you. >> my name is rahm and ryan. i have been practicing with the buddhist center for close to two years. i have been a resident for 19 years. over the years, my priorities have changed, but top of the list are a place to meditate and to sleep through the night. i have brought a map.

this map depicts the impact on neighbors and within a 300 foot radius, with data gathered in early 2010, when the rooftop was being operated before the notice of violation took effect. it is still relevant because the web page revealed their interest in promoting the rooftop for parties of 200 people or more, which is a far cry from the low- key restaurant that the current sound tests address. this map shows what happens when the rooftop operates more like a bar or nightclub. the red dots on the map indicate where there were reports of noise impact. 57 households within the 300 foot radius area would be of firstly affected. over half the residential

households signed a petition requesting the city control noise for the rooftop. these numbers represent only the neighbors we were able to get in contact with. obviously, i would ask you to consider the neighbors who did sign the petition who were not able to be here today because of work or child care schedules and other reasons. they are certainly as important as the people who were able to make it here today. the noise is a real and significant problem for the surrounding neighborhood. many members of households were not able to sleep "rooftop was in full swing. many others were agitated. president olague: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i have been a member of the san francisco buddhists for the past six years. the center has been a great

support to me over this time, especially when i was recovering from a back injury. i believe the center has a moderating effect on the neighborhood, allowing more of the diversity and vibrancy the mission is known for. in the 300 foot radius is a working-class neighborhood. many of its neighbors could not take time off work to attend a hearing like this. one week talked to our neighbors, we heard the same story over and over, that people need a good night's sleep so they can perform well at their jobs and keep their jobs. the jobs are key to their being able to continue to live in san francisco. we heard many heartbreaking stories while talking to our neighbors. we feel prioritizing 7 businesses over homes is not viable long term. both need to be balanced in this

to burst neighborhood. the balance is part of what makes the mission such a vibrant place to live, work, and play. many of our neighbors are concerned about the type of clientele, especially on the weekends, when it is open until to william. thank you very much. >> good afternoon. i have submitted a letter in response to the categorical exemption findings. the highlights are as follows. ceqa requires evaluation of the cumulative effect of the project and other past, present, and future projects. the cadx did not include the sky terrace, even though that are linked. we recommend this be considered in the noise control

recommendations. the cadx findings also erroneously cite a concurrence from the department of public health. the noise criteria are not applicable to noise generated by individuals while dining. we discussed this at length. the need was identified for evaluating the separate effect of voices, particularly in light of the conversations. given the knicks used nature of the project area, we urge the commission to develop policies for restaurant use which balance the needs of the neighborhoods. examples could include noise evaluation guidelines and speech intelligibility in neighboring residents, -- residences, and limiting the cumulative time as each new business is added.

25 bartlett street was unavailable during the initial sound study for the project. some measurements at this location are critical in evaluating the success of acoustical barriers. we recommend as a condition of approval that the studies comply with the criteria at this residence to be verified. there are also no provisions to enforce the sound system. we heard they are planning to use a noise limiter. we recommend that there should be a condition that such a system be mutually agreed upon. president olague: robert henderson, sam ruiz, and others. >> good evening. as you all know, i was going and raised in the mission, and i have come here numerous times in opposition to a lot of projects

that have caused gentrification in the mission. but i am here today to tell you a little bit about this project. when gus came to the community and wanted to build this project, we were skeptical. we had many questions and concerns. he gave us his word and that he would provide many benefits from the community, from employing people in the neighborhood to providing space for nonprofits, which he has done. we met with him about the rooftop and he said he would work with the neighbors and other businesses to deal with the sound issue, and he committed to putting up -- i do not know the name of those walls that are see through, but he did that. that. i am here to tell you that we