>> to come to us if there was a bad poe in his area? >> no, no, no, that's part of the criteria to trigger a hearing in front of the entertainment commission as opposed to a review at staff level that's what this list is it's part and parcel of the decision as as to whether we bring this to you. >> i don't see this as bad. . >> i don't think it's bad i'm i'm just curious. >> i mean the larger they are the more the more the more attendees etc. >> if they are getting complaints it's more likely that the new neighbors will have too so it's likely they will get ahead of that. >> that.

>> i think it would be good for us to know that another building going in there is going to have the same problems even though that entertainment has been there for for 20 years. >> yeah. >> that makes it much more clear. all right thank you. >> true. thank you. any other questions or thoughts about this complaint history? people are fine with 3 days and over 12 months? >> yes. >> let's move onto did density? 300-foot radius. >> sounds good. >> and poe history trying to recognize that there are historic venues that we want to remain and not get kicked out and 10 years was the number. >> wait a second if i open a venue and invest 2 million $2 million and i'm only there 3 years, , i don't count? >> what do you mean you

don't count? >> it's just a trigger for the hearing. you are still getting reviewed. >> okay can i tell you? who is going to read this piece of paper? isn't this a public document? so you are going to have entertainment venues read this piece of paper and the entertainment venue is going to say entertainment commission doesn't value me because i haven't been here for 10 years? that is what it reads like and sounds like. where did you come up with 10 years? >> it was a shot in the dark but again it's not that they are not going to get reviewed everyone is going to get reviewed. >> i understand that. >> what extra burden do you want to put on the project sponsor or the poe or to the commission as a whole and i think without the fewer criteria we put the more projects we see

and the more time it takes and the more time we add onto the development process so i think we want to find that balance. i get what you are saying, though, but i think it's challenging and i kind of agree with audrey but at the same time don't want to add too much work maybe we suggest 5 years as opposed to 10 years and here's why -- 5 years is a number that responds to the current development boom that we're facing and that's really what i think a lot of this, the legislation and even all of this is responding to, so. >> that sounds great to me. >> yeah. >> okay. >> 5 years. >> okay. >> any other thoughts about that year? >> all right. so these are the ones we came up with and i don't know if there's other triggers that people think we should be looking at. >> i just want some more clarification on your language if you don't mind. going down to

the paragraph starting with the hearing shall include the review conducted by the staff and or project sponsor as well as any existing anticipated efforts by the poe and project sponsor -- what does that mean? >> our staff is supposed to go out and actually take some sound measurements or the project sponsor can submit sound measurements and here's the ambient sound level at my project site and so it's a noise level hopefully both in the daytime and the nighttime and here's what we plan to to do around our material and see doorways and windows and hopefully does that explain that?

does that make sense? >> this is talking about materials and building criteria around sound tenation okay great thank you for explaining that. >> what if they are at the job proposed site are they going to take measurements to see an ongoing operation that that they are going to come up with a number? >> yeah. once that building is built and we do sound tests all the time for old buildings. >> the whole idea is to get this thing done and when the sound check comes, it will pass. >> and also the building should be built with the proper materials so that it avoids having the residents complain about noise whether it's from the venue itself or from people walking down the street, cars, trucks whatever jackhammers i just have one last question and then i'll give it up -- [laughter] i'm just

trying to understand how you got to all of this, guys. so it says if neither a hearing or meeting with staff has been deemed necessary the entertainment commission may encourage the project sponsor to meet with the effected poe permit holders independently of the commission to discuss noise concerns and then you are saying concerns of the existing noise a noise attenuation efforts and encouraged to submit a signed statement. >> this is what the president mentioned at the beginning of this conversation and that this was a conceptually this might proceed because every you know set of operators and project sponsors are different and it's often the

case when we deal with or our role as a mediator try to step out and let the folks, , neighbors work together and if you don't feel comfortable with it, do away with it but just in concept something small being built really far away from something tiny and quiet may not need a lot of practice. >> so if i'm going to invest 15 $15 million in a project and you are encouraging me to talk to the bar down the street and you are saying if i do in fact talk and suggesting or encouraging that i submit a statement to you -- who has time for you? i'm building this building. you encourage me to do it i'm not required to do it and that is the problem for me. we here at this commission want to require

entertainment venues to go to all the residential neighbors and do all this stuff but developers are only encouraged to do it and don't have to do it. >> again, the point was that someone 's 15 or 20 $20 million project is probably not going to be the case that we're discussing here it's probably something smaller but since i don't know yet and i think part of the problem that we're having tonight is that there's a lack of knowledge in my case, too, of the development process as it stands. it's hard to do this you know i wanted to get this in front of you tonight because this is going to be in the matter of 2 weeks law that needs to to be implemented but it doesn't need to be tonight without information regarding and understanding the development process that you need to decide because i feel like i'm being

attacked. >> i'm not attacking you. [laughter] we're going to have this planning department there why don't we just continue this until after that and we can ask the planning department the questions that we would ask based on this. i mean for those of us who have tried to build anything in san francisco the planning department process is a long and ardo u.s. one and people trying to develop in the city go through hell and there's no question about it and i understand the sensitivity and something else added to the developer's plate and as as far as i'm concerned as an industry rep here my job is to represent my industry in the best way i can and so what the developers have to do in the process of developing their project we should make

it so they have to do it i mean they have to do so much this one little thing is nothing in the scheme of things but for those of us who don't understand and have more questions why can't we just continue this discussion until after that meeting. >> you can do whatever you like. >> we can absolutely continue i had actually said we could just i actually asked could we make this a possible action item instead of an action item. >> it's not really a thing [laughter]. >> anyway point being we can continue this i think it's fair to wait until after the sort of planning 101 thing that we're having with the planning department to your point, though, i agree i think we would want to make sure there's some heat behind the developers saying you are required to submit a form required to submit a letter if you are going to

bypass this hearing process to meet the matter of semantics and -- >> today i met with this guy says everything is okay we're good to go and actually it's not true. he submitted a document to us and the document is incorrect or doesn't follow through that has some enforcement behind it and now we do have teeth so i think that we need to make sure that we that we can enforce it if we're going to protect entertainment in our rich and vibrant entertainment oriented city. >> at the end of the day we have the power of recommendation to the planning department and we also have the power of stalling the process by trying to demand kind of stretching out this hearing or timeline around it. the teeth is we're in the picture and you need to play with us. the teeth isn't you have to

do all of these measures and you have to whatever our recommendations might be just know that that is just what we have to work with and maybe next year we try to add a little bit more teeth to that. i have an order for speaking so lee and commissioner perez. >> i want to make sure that we have given the staff what you need to start this and in a few weeks time. my question is how often can we review and amend this process? >> i don't think there's a limit. >> okay so as much or as often as we want. i feel some of audrey 's concern stem from once we approve this this is like our new development review process bible and i don't feel that way i feel this is going to be

a living organic document that changes constantly as we learn all the lessons we need to in what is un chartered territory and i don't have the same concerns i kind of feel like this can be changed. >> it's policy it's our policy and we can change that as often as we need. >> why doesn't that make you feel okay? >> what makes me feel okay is to know that we have a good working policy that makes sense to not just for the developer but makes sense to the industry. >> of course. >> that we're trying to protect and so, as joslyn is saying she doesn't know what she's up against she hasn't done this before and giving her more information about what she's up against by this planning department is important i think in order to ensure that staff has the

tools they need. >> commissioner lee and commissioner perez. >> getting it done right or 90 percent right is the best way to do it and some of us have been through it and we were consulted and we know it and nobody has asked us. if you are going to do that, why don't you ask one of us that's gone through it. >> can you clarify? >> through noise problems you know we have neighbors in the alley and their club was there obviously way before the condo was there. >> this is your opportunity to raise your voice. >> this is the first time we've ever been able to discuss it as as a group. we have to draft something for people to discuss. >> it's a it's a good basis. >> if there's anything, commissioner,

that you want to add to it. >> i'm on the same page i'm just saying if you are going to put this down and we're going to discuss it in public, you know, and it makes it like like what audrey is saying it should be an industry policy rather than a department policy you know there's a few things here we need to adjust you know. >> there's a big giant thing called draft right here [laughter] just so the people of the public that don't see that very clearly we're only talking about a draft and i think -- i'll take a comment from commissioner perez because i think the spirit is to continue this until after our next meeting sorry the training with planning department which is actually right before our next meeting hopefully have more information to make a real action at that point. commissioner perez? >> thank you. i want to clarify how the public and community can be involved in the process.

you said a 3-person committee so that's own to the public? >> yes. >> they have public comment and -- >> i think the hearing will be a public hearing and we can add language to this to make it more clear but it would be agendized and go out to the public but on the back, too, the idea is that though this development review committee would produce the recommendations that would be forwarded to the planning department that ultimately it would also come back to the full commission to say here's here's the report out on who we saw and the recommendations that were made and probably another item in our packet for us to read but it would not go -- you know we're not trying to put wool over over anybody's eyes over it but definitely would be public meetings. >> okay. >> all right.

>> one quick question -- is there anything in the legislation that requires a 30-day turn around? >> yeah you can extend that an additional 15 days if you need. >> okay thanks.

>> who is. >> there's a variety of resources. >> hang on. there are projects in the pipeline. after that you are going to be reviewing projects early on. they are so early on that, you know those kinds of that kind of information might be something that we, you know, i'm not -- i don't know but you're going to find out in 2 weeks i guess i guess you can say. >> yeah and the reason you see it on that form it's actually in the legislation that they have to provide

test after those things are

managed through how many more come through -- i just don't know. i may be able to answer and say yes this takes this many hours of every day but until i have any idea of the volume maybe we'll run out of land there's only a certain number of places for entertainment and zoning in certain parts of the city and only

. >> hopefully there there will be a full house at the correct auditorium on monday from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. and i think the agenda is really interesting and there's a

lot of good folks coming out early in the beginning of the session so if you can come anytime