experience with our entertainment venue owners in district six. and it is really more, the just in case question, and i know that that will certainly be a big concern for the neighborhoods but i have to say that we have had really good venue owners in district six and so i will just say that, and i did have a question about ex-expanding llp to outdoor, venues and i was just reading the language, and i know that it was before, and when it said that the local is in doors and 200 square feet and that also applies to the new amended language that was put in saying the outdoor plaza courtyard of 200 feet or less. enclosed by the surrounding buildings, with or without the means of public egress or egress. is that referring to the surrounding buildings or

ouplazcourtyard. >> i think that the plaza courtyard. >> okay. the way that it reads to me and i am not sure sf the city attorney wants to weigh in on this, it seems to refer to the surrounding buildings. >> what page are you on? >> page six. and that does not make sense, i know that it was the other way but i can see the confusion. i think that it is just good to clarify that. >> what? >> this is actually lines one and two.

>> we will deal with this after we duplicate the file is the language that i outlined before about the temporary permits being non-renewable that i stated for the two locations and the place of entertainment and extended hours, and then on page 6, line, two, and insert a comma after the word buildings. >> and then are we going to think about or consider any additional noise issues if we give an llp to one that wants to use it in an outdoor plaza verses in doors, i know that sound just travels much, much father when you are outside

verses within a building frame. >> so, the question is, are we going to consider... >> i guess what would be the considerations in granting an llp to the outdoor courtyard. >> so the biggest consideration is what you said, is that there is four walls and a roof and so you can't be required to contained inside of the building but we would obviously use the sound check and if you can get into a neighbor, unit, we would start at a decibel level and something that we can have a bright line on to know where it is, and violation or not. outdoors is a little more complicated at times because of the ambient besound moves around and so we are talking about to ten p.m. period. >> and so hopefully we do the sound testing at a fairly reasonable time frame. and then, when it really drops, the music is off any way. ten p.m. instead of is

ambient outside it really drops. >> you would test the ambient noise and similar to what we would do in a sound test situation for a larger permit because i did think that the pim impacts are real and i also want to just let you know that the number of llps is quite small, right now. and the number of these unexpected to be a large number, by a long shot. >> so, we will start slow and we will see how it goes. >> how many llps are currently granted? >> probably 25. at most. >> of just the first requests for an extension of hours? >> because, you have to wait a year without incident and so we are creating that process, now, and so there are th so this is

have a tool that starts slow, and hopefully this will work right out of the box. >> well those are granted an outdoor permit be able to get an extension from eleven p.m. after a full year. >> i don't think that the law is allows that. i think that we decided... we limited it to ten p.m. >> okay. >> i think that we made... >> okay. >> and the extension is just for a live performance, just for indoor. >> okay. >> thank you. >> great, colleagues, are there any additional questions or comments? >> seeing, none, we will move to public comment. i have several public comment cards, brian onan, joshua smith, kevin carroll, gary marlin joe grubo. and you don't have to do it in the same order, you can come up and start.

>> my name is brian onan, and i am, the walk the city in many hours and i am a little bit perplexed because a lot of these venues that you have discussed even where alcohol is sold, where there is dancing and so forth the noise level is not a factor, the city basically closes down pretty early into the morning hours. and the it is actually a safety factor to have many of these organizations running. the other thing that i have a concern about noise in terms of civil liberties. for example, in the mission, if you go there any sunday in particular, there are hispanic

christians speaking in spanish and using very homophobic hate speech and they are near the mission police station, and nothing is ever done about that. i do respect their right to freedom of speech, but they do encourage violence against transgender people in the mission and gay people. also, unions, who have protests, and where noise may be used against them and also how do you distinguish between, for example, the people on union square you are talking about, the guy that plays the drums or the bag pipe who comes occasionally and gives us beautiful music and there seems to be a constitutional problem there and so i would urge for a little consideration on some of the constitutional issues that are involved with this issue of

the noise. >> thank you. >> good evening, supervisors, so i was going to come up here and say that this legislation has come before the commission and vetted by the commission and the commission voted on it unanimously and that we were happy, the legislation, we felt was going to help us promote more responsible night life and give us further ability to do our enforcement. but, after hearing your questions, i wanted to address a couple of issues with regard to the outdoor sound and supervisor kim. these permit come before our commission and i pretty much require to give me their sound plan. for outdoor sound, right now, there is a new technology in speakers, where they are low profile and low throw. and it is something that if this goes through for outdoor sound i am going to require people to do that installation.

so the low profile and low throw and just involved the installation around a pool and very residential area, that we put 14 speakers in. we spaced them apart by ten feet, you cannot hear it at all, outside of the pool area. the throw is only 10 feet. so, this new technology is something that i am hoping and they are not, they are not request for evidence. and so i think that this new technology is something that we would ask the people to investigate, you know, and because they are not cost prohibitive, i think that that is really important and also with regard to the extended hours permit. i am proponent of late night food personally. and i really think that late night food is important in our city as well as in many other cities. and what we have seen a lot with the extended hour permits is primarily food. so having said that i just also wanted to mention that the members of the snac supporting this, and supporting but they

had to leave. so i wanted to bring that to your attention. >> thank you, very much. >> good evening, supervisors i am the executive director of the hotel council and also the board member of the id and i want to thank you, supervisor weiner to working legislation and supervisor chiu for the work that you have done to work with us in the entertainment industry, and the hotel industry will respect and honors the entertainment industry and we worked together to help people enjoy the time that they are here and i wanted to share with you the situation that this legislation is going to help us out. and my office is on union square and across from two major hotels and probably 2,000 hotel rooms within and right next to union square and quite often from one in the afternoon to ten at night we have a difference between drummers that come and just drum continually, and so it will be like sitting here in this

meeting today and having a drummer outside of your window drumming and in the evening we have a band that sets up that should have a permit but doesn't, that is four speakers pointing upwards and we talked about the sound traveling and this is pointing up at a hotel and an office building and a place for hours and sells cds without a permit. we call the police every day and we work closely with them and the situation if there is no ramifications if someone is cited so this legislation is helping us and we want to thank you for that tao. >> for those listening that the idea that definitely the freedom of speech is protected amplified is not. and when you have amplification on something that is bombarding a hotel that is selling to allow people to sleep, our hotels are issuing every single morning because of the drumming and live bands that are set up illegally outside of the hotels and that is costing thousands of dollars when it happens and

we thank you for the work on the legislation and appreciate it. >> thank you. >> okay, supervisors. i'm with becca and bfc and bfc has a management company that has venues that operate in president chiu's district. and representative kim's district. and i think that this is kind of a reasonable legislation. and i also had a couple of comments listening to the questions back and forth. and i think president chiu has done some great legislation and this is kind of a carry on and i also believe that the entertainment commission has been a lot more responsive these last several years and we appreciate that since we were all looking for kind of a responsible club owners, as well. and now, i would just say that as for the late night, you know, it is kind of a double

edged sword and so there has been an explosion of the underground late night venues, and they are in both of your districts. and it is kind of the and so they are out there and so they are unregulated and so i just kind of be careful about that. and so, that is about all that i have to say. and i want to support the legislation. >> good evening. >> i want to ask you a quick question, what would you do now that they are under regulated to deal with the situation. >> the under regulated clubs is just a police matter and they can't do anything with it. >> as far as... you have places that don't have a good late night plans, you can stay open a couple of hours, you have to do aband c and you have to have a security guide after eleven

in the eveni r mineighborhood m secure. but you have all of these guys kind of pouring out at 2:00 in and you are adding a low security on to the street as opposed to having these places that are unregulated. so i think that the answer to it is having venues that are regulated with good security plans, camera good lighting and whether that be a pis za place or a club, i think that it would be helpful. >> thanks that confirms a lot that i have heard. >> if i could just yeah, if i could just add to that he can change, i think that also, to be it is nuanced because we had a situation where the entertainment commission for a minute was interpreting the police codes to require that every 24-hour restaurant have a security guard in the middle of the night. and including for example, (inaudible) in my district, and a requirement that for some

24-hour restaurants i think that it would cause them just to close down in the middle of the night because it is no longer economically viable and so i think that it is important to different neighborhoods of different needs and corridors with different needs. >> thank you. >> >> thank you, supervisor and good evening, chancler with the union business and i am here to speak in support of this legislation this evening and i want to thank you for introducing the legislation and i understand and realize that there are probably (inaudible) indoor venues but i appreciate you accepting the amendment from supervisor chiu and urgent to address some of the other things taking place on union square in the sidewalks. and you have amplified news that is bombarding our business and our individuals are trying to work during the day and the guests that are staying at our hotel. again all of the (inaudible) we

called the police daily and to it and have urged us to introduce the legislation that will give them the tools to enforce the noise regulations in the area. we appreciate you introducing this and working forward to bring this amendment and we do support it. >> thank you. >> next speaker >> good evening, supervisors my name is (inaudible) and i am a permit consultant in san francisco and i have taken many project sponsors through the process. and i just want to say this, when the limited live permit was originally issued, because there was a lot of demands it was cost prohibitive for many venues to operate because of the accessive, the $2,000 fee and the inspections that you have to pay and whatever else you had to pay in order to obtain a permit. even though we only have 20 or

25 permits that have been issued, i don't think that there is any insurance did incidents on those that are problematic and i think that we are on the right track and however when that was issued there is an understanding that after a year there would be trailing legislation and everything else. but you did not want to put everything on the table at the beginning because it was new. and i think that after a year, we can see that you know, having the outdoor version of that up to ten, i mean, it is not uncommon for someone to have a house party in their own home with no permit or their backyard but ten has to be cut off for that because then is goes into disturbing the peace or adverse impact or what have you. in addition, i wanted to touch about the moratorium or the thing about late night, what has happened as there has been some police activity to monitor spaces to find out if people

are incompliance and so it is not a trend that there are all of those people that want late night and people that are operating without a permit and without a proper security plans and without the surveillance cameras and the proper security and without good lighting and not taking care tf and or the good neighbor policies them coming forward right now is a great sign, so now that we have more responsible owners and issues in more eyes and ears on the streets and so a brighter future with everybody in compliance now. >> thank you. commissioner lee? >> okay. hello supervisors, i am one of the entertainment commissioners in the industry and also a club owner, and i have had a poe since 1998, and we treat our poes as a gold, you know, asset of our business. and after extended hours, are

being in compliance with obviously tweaking this legislation, when i came on the board, the entertainment commission i see that there is a lot of language that had holes in it and it seems like now that legislation is here, supervisor weiner has tightened it up and i know that the moratorium situation, about the extended hours with supervisor chiu because i have been there trying to regulate or let these people know without a permit they should not be operating and they are coming for ward and complaining. but the thing is that in japan town there are a lot of karaoke bars, i thought that they all this permits but now they are coming up and there are rules, and since we are ourselves are accountable for public safety, these extended hours places should be as well. security plans, and how they regulate the sidewalks, eating outside, all of that should go with it. and so i am hoping that with

the tweaking of the language, this will pass, with full support, thank you. >> thank you, commissioner. >> and could i just wish our commissioner a happy birthday? >> spending time with us at the land use committee. >> happy birthday. i feel guilty. >> you had to come down. >> yeah. >> okay. is there any additional public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. so colleagues, could we first, there is just two, i think, minor things is one is inserting the comma is the other one is clarifying temporary poe and extended hour permits cannot be renewed. could we take those amendments without objection? >> and that would be the order. and then, could we have a motion to divide the file and let's... i always do that.

duplicate the file. >> that does not require a motion. >> and so i will duplicate the file, could we have a motion to reinsert 1070-36. >> i make the motion. >> could we take that without objection? >> that will be the order. >> could we have then a motion to forward the version one with the 1070, could we take that without objection? that will be the order and then in terms of urgent two, which still has and there is still a deletion of 1070.36 and i guess, why don't we continue that to the call of the chair? >> i think that would be good. >> and maybe, if we want to we

could strip everything else out so that we are clear that we are talking about that particular section, it is up to you. >> you mean to leave the rest except for 1070. >> yes. >> and there a motion to delete everything in version 2 except for the... i don't know, then you have the only remaining thing is that it is a deleted section that is sort of weird. >> we did not divide the file, we duplicated the file. >> yeah, so, we could just keep it as is, hopefully it will resolve it next week, if not, we can always do substitute legislation. but why don't we just keep this in the committee. and call of the chair? >> okay. >> could we take that without objection? >> that will be the order. >> item two. madam clerk, could you call item five and thank you for the

wall street folks for being patient. >> item five is resolution approving and authorizing an agreement for the convey ens of the parcel of real estate... >> supervisor campos and i see that mr. up dike from the department of real estate is here. if there are know questions, we will turn it over to mr. up dike to present. >> thank you, chair, weiner. and members of the committee, so today, we seek your positive recommendation regarding the dedication of 2094 to 1298 the street to the city for the future affordable housing purposes. as par as the development mixed use project at 2558 mission, and the new mission, heater building, the developer has an option to satisfy the affordable housing program requirements by dedicating property to the city.

and so long as the dedicated property yields a certain number, and meets other minimum standards that are found in the planning codes section 419. the property at 1294, and 1298 meets those requirements. and the property itself, is 11,672 square feet in size, located near chavez and south vaness and it has auto motive uses most recently on the site just to get you oriented on the location and i will have a map up on the overhead. push >> there we are and the subject property right here. a detailed of the property and

just off the corner of shotwell and chavez and a couple of pictures, as i say automotive related uses, those will be removed, prior to redevelopment for affordable housing purposes. the property was appraised by a third party appraisal for $4.2 million and the review of the property suggestions a level of mitigation will be required prior to development and the developer under the sale agreement with the city agrees to post some sufficient to address, that predevelopment work that is approximately $92,000. and we are up against undisclosed adverse environmental conditions as outlined in the resolution and agreement, capped at $500,000. that is more particularly outlined in the agreement that i will not bore you with the details. the property is delivered to the city at a purchase price of $1. >> the site analysis of the property confirms the yield of

up to 36 dwelling units for affordable housing purposes and the representatives and warranties associated with the sale were out of the ordinary that there is an involved third party. the current property owner, so therefore, this is not our template, purchase in sale agreement language, to address how one can make representations and warranties when there are two parties involved. the current owner, and the perspective owner and delivering the property to the city. but these issues have been negotiated to the satisfaction of the city and all of the party involved. >> and the conveyance is in conforming with the plan and consistent with the findings for the principal site on mission. so really with the office of housing, joins me with the presentation, and we have the

project sponsor here as well. >> if there are no questions or comments, we will open it up for public comment. >> thank you, >> yes. good afternoon, chair. weiner and president chiu and supervisor kim and my name is victor mar quez and i represent the (inaudible) and with us and i want to thank all of city staff that worked on this with us and it took several months to put it together, but we are very proud of the joint work that we have done, what sets this project from the other projects is the accessive community out reach that we have done. i have with me, some letters of support that i am going to be submitting to you in just a moment. and the project brought support for the mission residents and non-profit organization and cultural institution, and business, merchants and local,

small businesses, and unique employment of this project as you have heard is the affordable housing requirement through this city land was before you, and there is over a nine month community process that we engaged in. and undertaking this land dedication alternative to building on site, bmrs and we follow the community lead's in this regard and remain fully committed to this promise and the resolution is a combination of years of working together with the community, and recently, in the last few months, with (inaudible) of the city attorney to put the final paperwork for the agreement. and the number of units, on site that would have been a mere 14, but the land dedication will yield at least 46 outside. and so in sum, it is greater a number of affordable units with deep affordable levels to be said by the mayor's officer of

housing and we thank you for your support. >> thank you, next speaker? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am here to speak on 1294-8 shotwell street and my name is (inaudible) and i am the executive director of mission (inaudible) project and i am a long, long time resident of the mission district. and i am here to really support this project for the purpose of approximately 46 off site housing that will be on that site. and which the 14 will have been on the others. i think that will give the people in the mission, an opportunity to remain in the

mission, and not have to leave the city as all of you know, a lot of people are leaving the mission. so, i hope that you will support this project, and thank you very much for listening to us. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker? >> good afternoon, supervisors my name is (inaudible) and i am a resident of the mission district and i live three blocks from the shotwell street and i am here to support the land dedication. i actually was one of the community active vifts and residents from the community that was ininvolved from the beginning, of the planning for this particular site. and we are in full support of it as a community. and i facilitated a lot of the meetings with the community organizations in the munt as