noise levels used by the entertainment commission are the exact same base ambient noise levels you use? or do you do your own and have some measurement that was different than the entertainment commission? >> the measurements were different. my measurement, wilson eric's measurement, and the entertainment commission measurements. our measurements were similar to one of the measurements, the times the entertainment commission was out there. the wilson measurements for quieter than the ones we measured, which is one of the points in the report. the ambient noise level in the neighborhood goes up and down depending what is going on in the neighborhood. cars, buses, airplanes, equipment and various rooftops, people talking. to the extent that the ambience was measured by our firm or

others, it changes depending on the time of the even. vice president garcia: you took how many readings? >> we were at the bar for an hour or so. vice president garcia: mean you were outside, in front of the bar? >> we were across the street for a portion of that time. vice president garcia: what was the range? >> in our report, the outside measurements were about 63 dba or so. vice president garcia: that would be a medium or a mean. what was the range? >> i do not have that information. vice president garcia: did you choose the figure you chose? >> that is what is typically done in environmental measurements, what is known as the leq of the time we were

there, the term. it is used in planning analyses to arrive at the contribution of a particular noise source as compares to the already existing noise sources. if you have a freeway, for example, and want to add more lines of the added traffic, what does that do to the overall noise level due to the freeway, or a rooftop fan, for example? you add it to the environment that is on 10 hours a day. how does that change what is already existing in that neighborhood? we looked at what are the changes in the ambient noise levels, or noise levels at that site due to various operating conditions of the brickyard bar and restaurant. doors opened, doors closed

across the street and close in. vice president garcia: it seems to me that if you are going to establish a base based on those figures, you could choose a night when the bar was particularly loud, and that would establish a higher ambient noise level. that is why i am asking whether there is some range or other established way of deciding what the ambient noise level should be for a neighborhood. tell me this. what does leq stand for? >> equivalent noise level. noise goes up and down. it varies over time. the leq is a measure of what happens if you take that energy and make it equivalent over a particular time. vice president garcia: it is like a mean? >> it is somewhat like that, but

it is a little different than that. it is dependent on the time, and it is equivalent. vice president garcia: thank you. president goh: i have a question. maybe you can answer my question. it sounded from your earlier comments, and maybe mr. salter might be better to respond to this -- it sounded as if the measurements were taken at the ground level, and not a but the third level. i think i heard you say there is not a difference. >> that is correct. president goh: yet they were not measured. >> we extrapolated and used our experience to make that statement. president goh: ok. thank you. >> thank you. we can hear from the appellants

now. >> i am still a little bit nervous, but i am getting better at this. i am representing golden gate valley. i also live across the street from the brickyard. we are here to request this board rescinded the permit for a second store deck with adjoining open doors. although this board requested that the applicant themselves investigate the noise impact caused by their project and work with us to find technical solutions to meet our reasonable concerns, that unfortunately did not happen. instead, they came up with a custom some report, in our opinion, taken in a very minute amount of time to support their position that there is no

problem. the first time we were provided any information, even though we contacted them right after the appeal hearing and also at the union street association meeting, was when they filed their brief to this board on july 28. after they filed that brief, they've been contacted us and said come on over and meet with our sound expert. that was the night before our response brief was due to be filed. in that brief, they said there was no problem, which they have just said, and that no mitigation was possible or legally required. at that point when we got their brief, we knew what our experience was. since they did not do what this board had advised and we thought there were going to do, we did. at considerable expense, we hired an acoustician to evaluate

their sound report. when his review indicated the applicant's report was flawed and inconsistent with some bubbles that could be expected, he proceeded to the other technical data over several days to validate his initial assessment. as his report indicates an confirms our experience, this project violates the noise ordinance even under a favorable condition. we also requested he investigate possible mitigation optionsin ho options. in our last hearing, we presented evidence. the pictures, testimony of the impact on neighbors and the communities show the flaws of this project when you're a good -- of this project. we can argue about decibels.

we believe it is reasonable to expect the barn door is kept inside their premises and not come into their homes -- that bar noise be kept inside the premises and not be allowed into our home. we will answer any questions you have. >> if you will elaborate on why step should be taken, and try to make me understand those issues. >> the noise ordinance in san francisco is very specific. your later going to make sure

the offending noise is silent, and during those 10 minutes, you look at your sound meter and find the lowest repeating who sound level. that means some when our cargoes fire or a bus, you ignore it, because you are looking -- when a car goes by or of us, you ignore it because you're looking at the lowest level. this shows the variation of south levels and overtime. what you see are 10-minute periods, and i have four of those for monday and four for tuesday. this gave us an indication of the level of noise. you can see how the sound level goes up, but you are looking for

the lowest repeated noise level for 10 minutes. you can see eye to a red line that touches the bottom of the white line that represents the noise level, and you can see the typical noise level becomes lower as the night progresses, but as you past 10:30 or 11:00 at night, so that is how you arrive at that level, which is crucial, because the ordinance says you cannot achieve a level above this ambiance. does it involve any environmental studies? >> what is the difference between your ambient noise level and the entertainment commission?

let's do that number furs. >> it does not define what the ambient noise level is. it just shows several noise levels, but they do not provide a definition of ambient noise level. on the first visit, the envy of lawyers and -- n.v. of noise level is blank. the incident -- ambient noise level is blank. she took some readings across from the venue and then some more readings on the side street. he shows sound readings below the box with levels of 52, 51, 58, 61, so we've we stand by the requirements of noise ordinance, which is to look of the lowest levels, you can deduce that the

inspector -- >> go ahead and make reference to this. >> i circled those in red because if you reach those levels, you can deduce the ambient levels are 51 or 52. >> if they were going to determine there was a violation, it would have to be a decibels higher than which figure? >> and m b and level -- the audience levels -- ambient level. the level i came up with is the order of 51 decibels, based on

two nights of readings, looking at the lowest noise levels. i did not make any noise readings at the facility. we just tried to establish ambiance, because what struck me is the ambient noise level was so high, and the fact he isn'ase door open, it is an impossibility. ambient cannot be higher than noise from the facility. it tries to avoid the influence from cars, buses, and so on, as defined by the ordinance. >> i have no trouble following that logic. what i am asking is what is the highest reading coming from the brickyard, and what would

therefore be eight decibels lower than that? >> i did not make measurements of the brickyard by itself, but if we look good through readings -- look at the readings they took, you can see many readings are higher than eight sensible levels higher. it is also similar to the readings the inspector made on their first business. >> let me try again. what number did you assign that would cause one to say the brickyard was not in compliance with noise ordinance? above what number? >> it would be about 59

decibels. >> you are saying you got no reading from the brickyard. >> that is correct. >> is it reasonable to assume there is just a difference of opinion on what ambient is, that there is no violation on your part, because you did not take any readings that are greater than 59? >> i did not take any readings of the brickyard itself, so i am relying on the data who commissioner so -- the commissioner spok took. >> i want you to agree with the way i phrased it to make sure i understand its. the change by noise was never measured by you to determine if it was above 59, which would be

the outside figure if you were to use 51 as the base. >> correct. >> is there a departmental commonent? public comments? may i see a show of hands about how many people are planning to speak? if you could please line up on that side of the room, and if you have not filled out a speaker cards, i would ask that you please do so, or when you are done speaking, give it to hanim.

>> good evening. >> given the number of people, we have another case left to go. >> two minutes. ok. this is my second times begin in front of you -- time speaking in front of you. i am the owner of a company adjacent to the brickyard. both of us have been in business for two and a half years. we have created 100 jobs and significant tax revenues for the city. i have known there and and his partners to be responsible business owners -- darren and his partners to be responsible business owners, and i believe they should be allowed to have a patio to create a vibrant

community gathering spot, like the brickyard is now. i think they should be allowed to do this, because other businesses, including my business, are allowed to do this, and i do not think a couple of tables and chairs outside are going to create a lot of noise. i live a couple blocks away, and i year buses and cars outside. i hear people digging through garbage. when i go to napa, and i say, it is quiet but i made a decision to live in the city. sometimes it is noisy. sometimes it is quiet, but that is living in the city, and i think not allowing them to have this patio is an obstruction of commerce, and i would be disappointed in this commission and the city of san francisco, which is a supporter of local business and thriving community.

thank you very much. >> my name is kofi harker. i am a recent transplant from chicago and have been living in the neighborhood for a little over a year and shows the neighborhood specifically with its proximity to union street and chestnut, given the fact that moving from an urban setting, while i love the picturesque aspects of sand francisco, i also really like close proximity to local businesses, and night life, restaurants, and also, having a patio in downtown chicago is something i like to be able to do in terms of sitting outside, having something to eat, and visiting with friends. i have also been quite impressed by the overwhelming support of the brickyard, having moved to the neighborhood from chicago, and not only does of the building have my support -- the

patio and regard have my support, but they also have support -- and brickyard have my support, but they also have the support of three prominent businesses in the neighborhood. it also has three business associations -- 26 local business owners and also 1300 residents, many of which are in the 92143 zip code and also 125 local supporters, which includes myself. they are all listed here, if you need to see those. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> thank you for your dedication in this process. i am going to try to stay off the character stuff that has gone on in the hearings we have

had on this. i am a clinical therapists. i have an office down the street. i specialize in adolescence and families. i have clearly the biggest windows of anyone in this room in the residential area. i have no complaints about the break your personally. the fact is i've built my business on the health of the city. i sit on a joint committee for a jug and alcohol treatment -- drug and alcohol treatment, and i would not be advocating for this patio if i did not believe is brought hope to a of neighborhood. >> next speaker please. >> hello, thank you. i am here in support tonight.

i am in support of the brickyard. i am a longtime union street residence. my building is approximately two doors away from the brickyard, and there has been previous businesses that have been worth of brickyard is located now. that business was called the bayside. i do recall the windows being open in front of this establishment, and i do not recall there being any complaints. i do not recall hearing any noise coming from dayside itself. i feel the brickyard owners are much more responsible in controlling any noise that would be coming from their establishments. i do not see 12 tables being on the patio in front of the restaurant of a nuisance or an issue.

>> next speaker. >> my name is eric low, and i am a longtime resident, so definitely i am seeing the downturn of the street, and i really appreciate business owners such as susteren -- darren to bring entertainment back in a nice dining forum. i think issues of noise complaint should be put aside because of the fact that if you have a patio it is more of a dining experience and not a rowdy experience other people would like to see in the neighborhood. living down the street, i have experienced many different bars and restaurants that do not have patio's and find some more of a nuisance because people end up leaving the area and come out screaming into the streets. living in the alley where i do, i see that happen a lot.

darren is very responsible, and when i heard those readings were taken on monday and tuesday, it is easy to see where you can go with them begins and always being a lot quieter. >> next speaker -- where you can go with the ambient noise the a lot quieter. >> one thing that bothers me about this case is that there have been a lot of restaurants in the area that have opened. they have outdoor seating. this over and maybe six months ago. the bricks and had doors that opened into the streets. both of these areas have bars. it is unreasonable to think that an area like this one further in is being denied something the rest of the district can have. it has more seats than what they

are asking for. this was an area where many storefronts were. the brickyard has done nothing but add vibrancy to the area. it is only going to add more business to an area. i cannot believe anyone is trying to stand in the way of commerce. thank you. >> i am a resident in san francisco and also a business owner. i used the company, but we found them on google. we had a noise issue at our

first establishment on a cold streak, which is similar to union, who -- on polk street, which is similar to union. they have heavy traffic and have been created for mixed use. i just want to say that even though they have gone in our favor, we were able to avoid this process where we had an amicable agreement with the landlord. our landlord was happy. our tenants were very happy. expertise was definitely the finest. i also want to save us -- to say san francisco has a long history of being a vibrant nightlife community. i think we should be lucky to have people like logan and darren, to engage the

community. we could have owners who do not listen and cause trouble. these guys are doing what i think is best for the neighborhood, and i hope you'll approved their applications. >> next speaker please. >> i am from 2827 octavia, and i wish to point out union street is not one long commercial strip mall. we have lived in the location for over 30 years and survived. it is a great thrill to live by union street. there are college football games, and it is a great guy to hang at a bar, but when people get tired of the noise, they get to go home, but where can we go? this hasn' 100 yards of busines,

and sherman elementary school is a block away. the crab shack and bricks and are across the street from the shuddered metro theater. good no one lives there. ambient noise issue is not the same. the reason people complain about process and government regulations is the government levels the playing field. neighbors are no match for the developer. we have been opposing this since the front of the building was ripped off without a permit over a year ago. recently we were invited to see the brickyard. it is clear to me if the three doors were open and there are 30 or 40 enthusiastic people at the bar, there will be plenty of noise. they say we can call and they will address this issue. i doubt they want to be known as wet blankets, always telling

their customers to be quiet. i do not think it is a role of the neighbors to call and complain. i do not want to be a wet blanket either. one of you said it was generational. let me introduce a little jewels. he is 17 days old, and his parents agree they do not want to have open bars with a patio. we are not opposing the business, just navarre's. -- just the bars. >> good evening. my name is eugene. i represent a condominium one block from the brickyard. it seems ironic earlier you had a hearing that a noisy bar