like theatres, bowling alleys, would those would be, looks like they would not be allowed to have liquor license? >> the legislation says if there is a transfer of a liquor license from an existing owner to a new location requires a new permit for that establishment. that's the control to determine whether that's appropriate. >> you are right. the transfer ability. i don't remember if this is on the file but how many of those transferable liquor license are there? >> it's within that 6 block area. >> let me ask if anyone wants to comment and we have a captain from here who we'll invite up to say a few words.

>> thank you, planning staff the planning commission considered this proposed ordinance on march 14th at the planning commission hearing. adopted a resolution with very specific modifications. if i may i would like to go through some of these now. supervisor chiu has addressed some of these modifications. the proposed legislation includes a ban on establishment and alcohol restrict use district. i want to know the commission recommended that it be removed from the proposed ordinance and primarily due to the fact that it's very difficult for the department to distinguish between, the sale of tobacco par paraphernalia and within

the polk street. the presence of any tobacco pair -- pair -- appear versus the score. second this was established in 2008 so any store operating an is a tobacco store, it's very difficult for us when a store began stock ---ing pipes. >> i saw supervisor chiu did add a supervision of 5 years. second was language that emphasize the enforcement of

existing operate errors was a priority. and existing promisity of existing bars so new bars within a hundred feet of existing bars would be prohibited. any other bars within the district would require a conditional use authorization and as amended, no new bars or liquor stores would be permd -- permitted within the proposed district. the commission recommendation that restaurants with 49 liquor license would be recommended remain open provided these restaurants continue to serve food until closing so they don't turn into bars. >> lastly the conditions recommendation was to modify the banning period for 3 years or more and i saw that in the

revised legislation to one year. the increase to 3 years. that's our standard period of abandonment pursuant to 183. i wanted to point out that slight difference. that concludes the modifications and i'm happy to answer any questions. think. >> a couple comments on that colleagues on response to planning. i want to thank planning's input on these and we did adopt some of these legislation. the issue of 3 years versus 5 years are issues we discuss ed with our bar owners. i think i have already addressed this issue as pose -- posed -- opposed to a

capment . that if you are talking about control, that is effective on a ban on -- it would have allowed a couple more bars on the periphery. putting a sunset on the cap was a more effective and cleaner way about this. i do want to mention the topic on tobacco. i pass legislation to place a cap on the number of tobacco. if you to get your tobacco pair pair

>> to say we should have complete paraphernalia control is something you would never want to see. the last thing i want to mention is we did have an a lot of meetings on this topic, i want to submit a record to the neighbors. carefully crafted proposal represents a product between discussion between neighbors and merchants and the supervisors district office and as with any process some would like to see the restrictions further and others would like to see relaxed. this is the interest of business communities and i would add a balance of what we try to do here. i know there are folks here who would want to see more restrictions and others who

would want to see less and as with the case with many pieces of legislation we try to balance the interest. >> i miss spoke on one piece. the tobacco paraphernalia is one district, i just want to clarify that. >> can i ask about the paraphernalia issue? i apologies. i was hoping you can explain the issue a little bit better. from a lay person's perspective i understand president chiu's point, i understand when there is a big difference between the store that sells multiple thing and that also have some pipes and tobacco rollers and a significant portion that is a tobacco paraphernalia. is it an issue we haven't defined what

that means. i was hoping we can clarify that. >> there are a few components to that. within the polk district, the presence of any amount of tobacco paraphernalia. makes it a tobacco store paraphernalia. any store with shelf space makes it a tobacco paraphernalia. >> actually it's not correct. in 2009 legislation i had it was very specific defined financing to be a percentage of the square footage. we did reduce it from what had been the case otherwise but it's not just anything. it's very clearly defined. what i understand from planning is that it's hard for you to measure what a percent from occupied force is or what

amount of feet of display, but there is a standard. >> so it's more aligned with the way that it's a tobacco paraphernalia shop. when it's based on how the shelves are stocked in theory it would be forward enough for an operator to remove those items and put them back and remove them and put them back. one idea we had is to consider some form of licensing to become a tobacco paraphernalia shop, but i understand it's somewhat cumbersome for small businesses. >> if it helps to figure that out, i'm happy to work with you on that. >> has there been instances when the department has been asked to enforce or were there case whenever we were able to successfully enforce this issue as well?

>> there have been cases where we have been, we think successful in enforcing them for a period of time. and again, we don't always know and we also think there have been cases in which it been impossible for us successfully enforce the issue because we too know when you walk into a store that it's probably a tobacco paraphernalia establishment if there happens to be an amount of shelf space empty, we know that the stock has been removed for the short-term. another thing brought up by enforcement staff when there is an issue of competition among tobacco paraphernalia shop will report a violation on another with the idea of reducing competition. i don't know how accurate that is or not, but that's what we've

heard. thank you. >> i would like to call up captain mckenna. >> supervisors, good afternoon. i don't have a presentation. i don't believe the entertainment commission took a formal position. they were interacting with supervisor chiu's office on a regular basis for feedback. i'm here to answer questions and want to thank you for the entertainment on conditional use situation and other amendments were made you are pretty please withdraw -- with those. >> we look forward to working on the entertainment commission. >> i hope your office will

assist us with resource considerations when we talk about enforcement of those good neighbor policies. >> we would be happy to consider that in the future. >> any additional? captain, please. >> good afternoon supervisors, public. greg mcgreek an that overseas the corridor. i came to speak to you on the current legislation moving forward. the polk street corridor has changed dramatically from with respect to law enforcement in the past 4 or 5 years where the challenges are different now. the establish ments that have come in have had a positive influence in the area. i think it's important that we recognize that there are a lot

of positive changes to that polk street quarter with these establishments coming in. we have seen however with the large influx of those that there are times where there are public safety health hazards from other issues that have popped up. this current legislation is moving forward to have this moratorium on the liquor license is one that the police department would support at this time because we need to work on a balance from where we are before and to where we want to continue to go in a safe manner. i want to say here as both the captain and representative of the police department to show our support for the legislation it's currently moves forward for this moratorium in the period of time in the understanding in the if you years we'll look at it again to see where we go. one thing that bears pointing out and this is for all public listening that i think we'll improve the areas that have

more restaurants down there. the positive we have seen in restaurants that serve alcohol that gives individuals to have an opportunity to enjoy a nice meal and maybe go to one of these establishments afterwards and it strikes a balance where we have restaurants and more bars. with that i just want to come forward with the police department's perspective and happy to answer any questions you might have. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i just want to ask the same question that i asked the office of small businesses. one of my concern is the off sale liquor licenses that we see in other parts of the city. what kind of restrictions generally happen and maybe i will just limit it to polk street in terms of the off sale liquor permits on polk street? >> currently we look at all the applications that come forward for anyone that wants to have

off sale we look at what business they have in the past. we look at the number of businesses in the area that currently have off sale and make recommendations based on what we see as a health safety and whether or not it has an influx already. on the polk street quarter there are a number of off sale establishments and at this time there is a sufficient enough that are there that we would want to at least try to manage it at the level we are moving to at this period of time . do >> do they sell after 2 a.m. >> no. they do not. but most that are open stay open until 2 a.m.. many open until 24 hours but they will continue to serve

alcohol until it's no longer legal. >> how do we ensure that they do not sell alcohol. >> there are ways to make sure. when we get complaints from neighbors we look at establishments to make sure they are not serving after 2 a.m.. there are times where the officers are working in the streets and if they were to see someone coming out of the store after 2 a.m. that was open they would have the ability to stop and talk to the person about whether or not it was liquor sold after those hours. most of the stores we have found, do not violate the 2:00 because it is such a risk for them to lose such a profitable thing for them. that's how we go about looking at ways to enforce to determine no one is selling past the legal hour. >> last i want to mention is the captain talked about bringing in more restaurants

and wanted to carve out the ability to bring in new restaurants which is something the entire neighborhood wants to see from merchants to bar owners and club owners. i want to say that publically and hopefully that will change as well in the coming years. >> great. colleagues, any additional comments? >> thank you, captain. i don't think there are in i other departments here. why don't we open for public comments. >> i have one public comment cards but i see there are a number of folks who also wish to speak to public comment. if shawn is here and anyone else who wishes to speak please lineup on either side to move this forward. >> good afternoon, supervisors, my name is shawn mars yack. there is a time limit? i have to be quick. my client is ddr

on vanes. because the time is short. i need to state the grounds for their objections for legal reasons and would like to get to solutions because everybody wants to talk about solution more than objections. the project currently has been determined to be subject to a sequel exemption according to regulation o c 2. respectfully that is not an exemption, that is something that governs when sequel applies. an exemption applies when something the determined by sequel passed by legislature or california resource agency. the project was determined to be exempt from sequel because it's not an i mpact. here bank or

significantly restricting a use of the certain area will displace that use to other areas of the city including without limitation to nearby areas where for instance liquor stores and bars currently are permitted. the displacement of use causes a host of physical impacts including patterns and cuing impacts, noise impacts because you are creating a non-mobile sources that are shifted to new locals and new sensitive receptors, their air quality impacts in traffic patterns and new construction. for safety issues, because there is unsteadied affected on police and fire response time. >> thank you very much.

>> next speaker. >> linda chapman. we need more control. people are asking for moratorium. lower polk neighbors is not a residents organization. it's an organization of essentially of bar owners and the smallest number of residents who live in the neighborhood commercial district from post north which is essentially what i'm talking about, there are a few residents that come up from alice street. you are not getting much from residents. the conditions are horrible. my sister tried to take a bus and every bar there is a huge

crowd. the streets are full. the noise is horrible. people have -- one building they submitted 60 complaints to the police in as many months about the noise going on like a football game from maybe 11:30 until 3:00 a.m.. finally the only enforcement has been police. chief sent his top guns to come up with a new plan and now we have a new captain. these operation are operating illegally 47 licenses are operating as night clubs and straight bars. even the health department says they couldn't be a restaurant, they don't have a kitchen and don't do anything like that and because they open until 2 a.m.. the restaurants become bars and night clubs. like the places

like maze that used to be a restaurant. the tables are cleared away so it can be a dance floor. the conditions on the street are just unbelievable. people are bused in from the east bay. >> thank you, miss chapman. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i saw a picture of you. now we are back off the smoking chain gang. an all the smoke bar -- singing.

[singing] makes you forget everything. [singing] >> next speaker. >> thank you. terrence allen from the culture association. thank you chair wiener, supervisor kim, supervisor chiu. my comments are very

truncated and my apologize if i don't focus on something at great length. with two minutes it's hard to do this. i want to thank your staff especially amy chan for all the work in the community and want to thank supervisors for his continued reminders that there are alcohol serving establishments and to the business owners and neighbors for participate ing in the process and the captain and jossyln cane for her excellent in the leadership in the entertainment commission. the entertainment commission was to separate enforcement.ey -- i urge supervisors that we

don't destroy that important separation of enforcement and granting of permits. with regards to abc and liquor sales. all abc license come out of the box with the current restrictions and it's only through the community process that it's reduced. the abc has a present decoy process by which they arrest and obtain who they are selling and to minors. i want to recognize the removal of the 180 degree definition. it is a very good compromise to come to a year. the removal of cu entertainment the important. >> thank you, mr. alan. next

speaker. >> i would like to pass these out to everybody. also i would like to have an overhead. first i want to point out the concentration of off sale liquor licenses in the san francisco and in particular along polk street. anyway my name is michael nolte the program director of the coalition. our organization is in favor of the 5 year moratorium of all types of liquor licenses within the restrict use district for the following reasons. the density of establishments of alcohol permits which this map shows. the violent crime that is associated with alcohol and this here map shows here. this is along where the polk street would be. and the property

crime which happens again right in here is where polk street is. in order to protect both the tourist and fellow residents according to the pacific institute for research and evaluations strarts -- restaurants with bars and liquor occur the most frequent list of violent crimes, burglary, theft and other kinds of vandalism. so there is a direct correlation between alcohol sales and crime. thank you.

>> thank you very much, next speaker. >> overhead please. >> good afternoon supervisor my name is john nolte. we did extensive discussion over 6 months on this topic and on this piece of legislation. however, a letter and nobody from the leadership of lower polk here and/or the other neighborhood mid polk here either, i'm he at the last minute with more additional amendment. so i'm just going to refer to the map that i do have

of lower polk showing the current liquor lbsz and -- license and that is at this area, even though you are going to limit it to the current licenses that are there you have gaps and having those gaps you are affecting these areas. i want 500 feet so there is no gaps on this legislation. thanks very much. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? seeing none public comment is