patronage. both their patronage and their corporations of private rentals, particularly during the holidays, it's been devastating. but despite the devastation, mr. montoya and his wife and the club have been 100% compliant on the limitation that was imposed upon them last summer. back to the neighbor issue. mr. mr. montoya has send two, maybe three e-mails to the diamond family, explaining the work that has been done, explaining the ongoing work, and explaining what needs to be done. the club and mr. montoya, and miss king, his wife, with a positive force in this culture, in this community, of the

endorsements, if you want to call them that, before you, attest to that. it's not just organizations that are well known, like the african american naacp, and the african american -- i correct myself, naacp, and the african american chamber of commerce, but there are smaller organizations that have benefited by the use of this club and by the input of mr. montoya and miss king. one last thing, my third point, also, i have submitted some recent reports. none of them are of any significance. i think it was -- they were missi missing -- two cases of missing cell phones, which was resolved. in fact, the security force at the club, if a woman were to leave a purse or pocketbook hanging on a chair, they will

take the purse, put it behind the bar, and when the woman comes and asks for it, there it is. they've done their best to avoid those kinds of situations. it's a responsible security organization and there's a representative here who can speak to that if the commissioners want to hear. there is one issue that i'd like to defer to mr. montoya. there was a violation, and i am less informed and less coerceant with the details -- with the violation. i think the actual violation was on the 24th, and the actually violation was issued on the 27th. i feel that i can't present an adequate detailed explanation of what happened there, but i would call on mr. montoya to address the commission about

that, please. >> if you guys have questions about that, i could address that. as far as everything else goes with the sound improvements that we've done, i can go into detail with that, as well. we've seen a significant drop in the decembibel levels that we've done with our alley rolling doors, which are three doors. we've also done a sound study, as well that we've got a lot of information of just on the broadway street that we're at. >> you're talking about kevin o'connor's e-mail? >> i'm sorry. i didn't hear the question. could you say it again? i'm sorry. >> i said is the sound study the e-mail from kevin connor? is that the sound study?

>> that is about the sound actual study that we have done. >> where is that? >> it should have been provided in your document. >> when did you submit that? >> it was e-mailed today? >> why is it getting e-mailed to us today? why not, like, a few days ago so we can have a chance to -- >> in order to complete the study -- i mean, the person that did the study is here, if you have questions for him, as well. i have the report here, as well. >> i think -- can we see that report? >> it's more of a -- >> can i see that, too, because i don't know if i received that. >> right after that. >> and i printed everything you sent. >> this is not the whole report, this is just the memorandum. >> oh . this is from mr. pauli. this is in the back. >> you've got one. >> kevin connor's is just the

timeline of what he has done and what has been recently done. >> okay. so when i'm reading kevin o'connor's on january 10th, he said he turns the music up as loud as he could, but doesn't say how high. how high is as high as he could? it's very vague. what is the internal decibel in order not to bleed out? >> sorry about that. inspector burke reporting. the internal sound limit is 98

decibel a-weighted and 110 decibels c weighted, and that's designed to keep them in compliance with the city's code. in this particular case, i can test compliance in the alley using the city's code. >> well, i'm just saying is the report, whatever the report should say is if you play it -- i'm talking about independent study now. if you play it at that level, what is the readings outside the alley or whatever the problems are happening? and i don't have anything. >> so maybe i can try to clarify what i -- what i read, what -- the external ambient level at broadway and roland is 80 decibels, so they were required to stay within 80 decibels c-rated along the

alley. >> so in order to stay within that, they have a certain rating that they cannot go any higher than a certain level, correct? >> i asiphsigned them an inter level to help them prevent exceeding the ambient level outside. >> and what is that? >> the ambient level outside is 80. >> no, inside. >> 98 a and 110 c. what i read in the report from kevin o'connor is if he now turns their system up as loud as it will go, they are in compliance with the ambient -- >> 80 decibel. >> correct. >> you concur? >> i have not been on-site since... >> just, i ask inspector burke to hold off on giving them a new level at this time. >> well, first of all, they're saying their soundproofing is

only 90% complete. we like to have it all completed and then rechecked just to have a -- >> if i could respond to the 90%. the only thing that's missing on the 10% on that is an actual sound -- sound sweep, an automatic sound sweep to one of the doors. not even -- it's not our external doors. >> do you expect us to wait or just approve it without the door sweep? what happens if it's not the door sweep? >> well, there's a total of three doors. two doors that are external to roland alley. the one that's missing is an internal door that goes to the second external door of roland avenue. all the external doors have been completed. now the internal door that are

missing that sweep, it's a special order. it was a 48-inch door. it had to be made, with that, it's going to help with the decibels. so with what has been done already, 90% of it, it has already dropped the decibels reading from three to seven decibels. i would like to say this is just an added bonus that we're doing to try to make it as soundproof as possible, what we're thinking was recommended to us by sound consultants to -- or to -- where the leakage is. right now, this is something that we're doing to find the leakage. before that, i'd like to note, though, that we have always been in compliance for ten years in the alleyway or in just compliance in general. this is just something that we're doing to help improve our -- >> but you just got a ticket.

>> yeah, and we could address that, as well. i mean, there's a number of things that we've found that are inaccurate with that ticket. >> okay. you want to tell us? >> from paperwork -- numerous paperwork from the report to the name on the ticket to the case study to where we have found that the -- to where the level was actually taken, and to where the case study is showing that in the alley with is actually the sound waves are getting increased. i did not speak to more in detail about it, but the person that did do the case study for us is here, if you would like to ask him questions about that. >> okay. >> hello. commission. my name is jordan pauli. you guys know me well. i'm a regulatory consultant. it's getting a little crazy

right now, but i wanted to get it to a point where you guys could really understand it in a very simple way. so if you have any questions, specific questions, i'll answer them, but we can talk specifically about sound in the alley and some of the issues that i found. i have data, but i just takes time to turnaround a report. we just finished last week. >> okay. obviously, you see when rdr's come in here and they're sound -- >> no. i'm not even -- i get that -- >> i mean if you guys are not ready and prepared, why don't you continue instead of everybody coming here, and we have to listen to this again, but i'm just saying. i'm open to give you back whatever. it's all like -- the data's very loose. >> sure. >> you're telling me -- >> i'm not telling you what you should do. i'm trying to help the commission understand the issue the best that i can as help. >> i think at this point, i

think the commission wants data. >> sure, sure. >> in writing. if you put your name to it, let's have the data, that's all. we hear a lot, and we've -- >> no, of course. >> and -- >> of course, of course. >> it's a matter of trust issue, and instead of like he said, she said, whatever, let's put it in writing. >> of course. >> let's have the data so we c can analysize it. >> if we could work together outside of the hearing so we can set parameters. the point of what i'm trying to do is make sure the questions that i discovered at my work deal with this issue. >> that's fine. >> let me finish. let me finish. the parameters are set in a way that brings accuracy to the report. i love the commission. i'm not here to make anyone look bad or nothing like that. >> well, i want to --

>> let me finish. i think maggie does fine work, and sean does fine work. i think when sean comes out, we'll bring clarity to the sound issue. one of the issues is there's a standing wave issue. and basically what happens is at a certain level -- the study is not -- they were closed one weekend, and we came out and we did some sound tests, and we found there were sound waves, and the sound distortion in the alley is the easiest way to think about it. now, at the same time i thought it was going to take time to compile a report, something that you can get behind or -- >> let me ask you a question. >> sure. >> so if you're saying the standing wave is causing the influx of level to go up, so what happens if we wait for that standing wave, and we set the level when that standing kw wave hits. i'm just saying, that could

lower your internal decibel if you're going by the standing wave. >> that's something i need to write a report about, because trying to explain it off the cuff, there's no way where i'm going to be able to explain it in an intelligible level, especially under these circumstances. what probably needs to happen, and it's up to you and it's up to staff, we need to sit down and go over some of these things and go out and do a follow ups set of tests. but given the tests that were done about mr. o'connor last week, they're going to be fine. we brought the sound level to maybe 76 at the peaks. it was 74, 75, 76 at the peaks. >> what was playing on the inside. >> various, like, a play list from spotify. >> no, what's the decibel?

>> in the main room, it's anywhere from 100 to 107. >> when kevin was in the back, you were playing it at 107. >> what do you mean, in the back. >> well in the alley, where not the noise was leaking. >> yes, in the main room, the interior. >> so you were playing it at 107. >> anywhere from 100 to 107. in the front room, we're looking at 95, anywhere from 90 to 95. >> okay. so in a report, especially if kevin's going to do an e-mail, it would be nice if he tells us what decibel he's playing it at so we can -- because he doesn't say. he just said he can turn it up as loud as he wants. >> well, i think in the report he said he can turn it up as loud as it can go to where it doesn't peak over the ambient that was given to us. >> i have some questions here, and they're actually more for the director and inspector

burke. so it seems like the sound is causing serious issues for the neighbors named the diamonds. are they -- when the initial readings were taken, were they -- was their house part of the equation or their front stoop when the initial limits were set? >> inspector burke here? >> i have been inside the residence. sound levels inside their residence did not factor into the establishment ambient level, nor the setting of the internal limit. >> yeah. >> i have -- i've experienced what -- what it sounds like, what it feels like in their unit, but i stick very closely to the code and the instrument in my method alleology. >> but they were playing their internal music at the legal limit that you set when you

took the reading in the apartment? >> i didn't take a reading in the apartment. i entered the apartment to get -- gain knowledge about their experience and have a discussion with them about their experience with the -- with the sound coming from hue. i wanted to gauge -- >> have we done an actual reading in their apartment? >> we have not. that's not required by code? >> so in this case, the -- >> the code only speaks to at the property playing of establishment. >> we've gone into neighbors having these issues. >> we have, and i think that in the past, when we -- the code does not speak going into residences and doing readings. you know, it really speaks to at the property plane, and so it's a little tricky because when we do go into neighbor's

residences and take a reading, what part of the code does that speak to, how can we regulate that? we can't. we would have to justify that with a change in code, honestly, so -- >> yeah. and then, when you say the soundproofing's 90% done, when the soundproofing's finished, we're going to go in and set new limits. >> we can go in any time and test. it's all science. >> the idea would be wait until they're finished -- >> my idea was to hold off because this was last tuesday i believe when i spoke to mr. bloom, and he said they were going to be having this hearing on wednesday. sean could come out after that time and have another meeting with the sound engineer. based on what the commission said, i thought it was best they use their independent

contractor and that we would wait. i could take my guidance from you guys this evening to have sean set a new limit or we could do that independently -- it's based on science, so if they've made any improvements, it will likely reflect in a higher reading, but i -- i basically just wanted to bring this before your guys's attention before i made any move. >> can i add something about 90%? the internal soundproofing is 100% done. >> i understand, yeah. i'm just thinking for your own sake. >> gotcha. >> if you're going to get another reading, you probably want to make sure that's 100% done, not 90% done, but i understand what you're saying, that it could lead to a higher rating, which probably could create its own set of circumstances that would then have to be mitigated. >> can i add one thing, too? we have no intention of trying

to raise our sound level in our venue. we have no intention of that. i don't think anybody has an intention. somebody the d.j.'s get deaf. >> it's not possible for our rating for the d.j. to turn it up with our compressor and our limiter. if the d.j. cranks it up as allowed as he wants on the mixer, it is not possible for the d.j. to make it go over the levels that we have set. >> can i ask another question through the director? let's say the soundproofing's finished, and we set a time to have a new sound test done and perhaps a new limit set. outside of the science, which is the code, what other -- what other options do we have as a

commission? what kind of conditions, etcetera, do we have? trying to help the situation? >> just to kind of clarify, i think as a commission, you would have to take action to lift the board of appeals condition which set them at, you know, ambient at the property plan, which is not what our code says. our code says they can be eight above ambient at the property plan, so if we went out and did a test, i would want your guidance on whether or not we're having sean, you know, keep it at ambient at the property plane, and based on, you know, whatever work they did inside, their reading could go up. it could go up significantly though, if you were to condition it back to code at eight above ambient at the property plan, so that's why i would really want your guidance. am i answering your question? >> that's good. it seems like the sound issues to me, it seems like they may

be within code, but it's still causing serious, serious issues for certain neighbors of yours. that seems to be unarguable. >> which we've seen in other places, though, as well. >> yeah, and it may be that it would be worth a change to the code, but that's not our purview. >> well, we are -- this is a totally separate topic, but we have been working with dph on making improvements to the code in regard to how -- the sound. >> if we were to grant them the ability to operate, if we were later back to the original hours, it's kind of a nightmare snow area that they could turn their music up, which people would find probably -- people would find probably for other reasons for you to be here, and it would never end. i'm thinking what options do we have to make sure that doesn't

happen. >> i just want to make one clarifying point. inspector burke. so if they don't have an intention -- if they don't have a need to become louder inside the venue, if they're happy with their current level inside, and they're doing improvements to outside, there's no reason for an additional sound test. the ambient stays the same, their limit stays the same. the sound abatement improves. >> but it's still getting -- we still got a ticket, you know what i mean? i mean, it would be nice just to have here's the data, they're in code. we took it at these levels, regardless of the standing wave. they're in compliance to the plane, and we're done. >> and this ticket was issued before this work was completed. >> huh? >> just for timeline sake --

>> yeah, so now that it's almost done, make sure that you're finished, and let's take that final reading and get that data. >> i think there's something that internally by itself and our sound engineering should be working with sean and maggie and the director because of our studies that we have found, and i mean, i don't think this is the time and place to go into the details about this, but i think we should be working about this violation as well. >> here's what i think. i don't think we're in a position at this point -- and correct me if i am wrong -- to rule on the hour restrictions, or the conditions that were put on there. i don't. i think -- i think you've done a lot of the work. i think you're close. i think there's some sound reports that haven't had a chance to be compiled yet. you still have a few things to add onto the end. it seems like you have done a significant amount of work, and

i commend you for that. it's not easy. i would not feel comfortable personally yet ruling or making a ruling when they're close. to me, it would be very helpful if -- you know, if we were to delay this or put it off, and the next time, if there was a more coherent presentation or method of where we're at based on data, which we need -- >> as far as the data goes, what exactly -- are you guys wanting the actual interval data of the time samples. >> that's something you can work out with director weiland. >> so just to clarify, this is something that is usually done by a third party contractor, but you know, we -- >> we can look at the sample and see what we get. >> i can share with you some versions of that that we receive on our end, and i'm

happy to offer inspector burke to go out. we actually included in our legislation sound requirement c. it's almost better i think to have an outside party for this. >> so let me make a suggestion. like the last, the previous applicant, with the grubstake, their sound was checked. i guess they have a meter just sat there, and it recorded from 6:00 a.m., all the way for 24 hours, and they gave us the data. but the neighbors, they see that you're in compliance, you've got that data. how can the neighbors kind of like fight the actual data? now, the data shows that you're not in compliance, then, we have to find out where that leak is coming from so then that data is taken care of. >> so this is -- >> for both parties: for yourself. you won't have to take these

calls from the neighbors if you're in compliance, and we don't have to continue to -- >> if i'm not mistaken, was this not done before with my entertainment permit before? >> no, not -- not in this detail. usually, the inspector goes out, and now -- which he's doing, and then -- but there's still a leak. >> with -- when we first got our entertainment permit, there was intense research with sampling done. we have not had a violation since that date. >> but you have done some remodelling. >> i've had done remodelling, and in each remodelling, we have more soundproofing. >> okay. maybe you're not missing something. >> i am not missing anything because we are in compliance. there's going to be data that -- >> well, if you're getting -- give us the data -- >> where you take a sound measurement to see if someone

is in compliance is not in -- you have to be four -- perthe code, you have to be a certain amount of feet away from the venue. you also cannot be standing next to a wall, which will amplify it more than six decibels just by standing next to a wall. >> okay. so if we get an independent sound person to -- to say -- say if that's the case. i don't know how it's tested, but we just need data. whether -- we just want to -- >> the data that is in front of you guys right now is not enough data? >> not enough. >> and also, you say it's 90% complete. >> external, the external soundproofing is 100% done on both doors. the internal -- i should say morli

morlike -- more like 98%. >> i have a letter in my packet that said we're 90% completely. bear with us. once we get finished, you won't hear us. i'm saying once you get everything. >> before we did this soundproofing, we were in compliance. we've been in compliance. we've been in compliance for this ten years, before we did this most recent soundproofing. >> but obviously, there's a problem. >> so that 's what you have that's going for you. i think that's why everybody wants to find an amiable solution that you're happy with. unfortunately for us, we have a multiple set of concerns that

we have to take into account, right, and one of them is the letter of the law and the code, which we cann enforce to a certain rate. but another one, we sat here i think it was six months ago for the hearing, and there was an incredible amount of evidence, and you may argue every single point, and you may completely disagree with it, right, and i'm sure you do. but there were an incredible amount of people who were saying very consistent things about what's going on at hue and how it's being operated, etcetera. and we have to balance both of those things together. you have to feel like you've been dragged around the streets in an unfair way, but we -- you know, we're trying to balance, two very important things. and in order for us to make a decision for you that you're happy with, we have to have every single box checked at this point, right? and you know you say it's 100%

done on the outside, it's 90% on the inside, we need that finished. if you're going to have jordan come up here and talk about the data, we actually need to see that data. it's like the last check box on this thing. that's the way i feel. but that provides you and it provides us all the justification that we need to then make a decision that maybe you're happier with. that's the way i see things here. i would like to hear public comment on this. i -- and have other people present here, but i don't have anymore specific questions for you guys. but you just have to understand when that many people come out, we have to behave in a certain way, and we have to be very careful because there's a lot of pateople who care about thi unfortunately, for us. >> may i ask a question? >> yeah. >> maybe i'm misunderstanding but my sense is you're

conflating that many people come out with the noise issue. >> no. we have to make sure everything is covered, right? and if -- a lot of the complaints that people had were around noise issues, right, so now, we have to make sure that everything is completely compliant. they were, and they were. we heard them. they commented, right? >> we're not addressing anything but noise, now. >> i'm sorry? >> we're only addressing noise. but commissioner seemed to indicate that many people -- it wasn't about noise. it was about fights happening. >> a lot of it was noise. a significant portion of it was noise. some of it was about the fights and the police incidents, but a lot of it was noise. >> of the 52 complaints that was filed and submitted to this commission and to the abc by the police and officer mathis,

4.5 out of 52 were substantiated, 8%. so when you say -- and it's our position that because of the positioning of the police car, the reports, the incidents were attributed to this club. that has been substantiated. that position has been substantiated by the abc appeals board. >> sorry to interrupt. it has also not been -- been substantiated by the abc, it has been substantiated by this commission. commissioner tan was part of that board, and it showed all the inaccuracies of these reports. to where commissioner joseph even mentioned about how inaccurate these reports are, and it weighs hujly gely on someone's permit. >> okay. and it weighs on sound.

since i've been on this commission, we were in cbd meetings with you. the neighbors wanted to work with you. they didn't file complaint against you because you said you would be working with them. i stopped going to those meetings, and you said you would work with these neighbors. >> if you see all those neighbors, they're not here. there's 30-plus neighbors in the same building that i'm in, and there's no complaints. >> that's what i'm going to ask. events, clubs unrelated to this club, two commissions have said, it's one complaint. we have one complainant here. it's mr. and mrs. diamond. the diamonds have -- and i don't know what their motivation is. i don't know them. i've never met them, i've never spoken to them, but it's troubling to me that a man's

livelyhood, depending on mr. and mrs. diamond -- maybe they're racist. maybe they don't want black people there, but how come they're the only people, the only people complaining. >> okay. i do want to acknowledge that there is a letter from supervisor pen kinskin's that the comment that a lot of the non-english speakers that did come in and made comments during the meeting e they', th afraid to return. >> i missed the word, i'm sorry. >> there's a lot of seniors that live in the sro's across the street, and they're scared. >> scared of what? >> scared of complaining. >> so that's why the supervisors, sometimes they have to write a letter at the end of the day to work with

their constituents. >> i would love -- >> okay. let's just stop it here. let's get us the data. get everything that we think we need to protect yourself, to protect the neighbors, and to also protect the code. >> can i work directly with you, commission, to give me specifics on what you guys need because last time i was here, you guys told me to come with a plan and what we have done, and you guys told me that's what you needed. now you're telling me that i need data, and this is not -- >> it's not complete. you told me -- i got an e-mail from kevin. i got kind of a memorandum from ollie. >> pretty detailed e-mail from kevin. >> no, because he doesn't tell me what decibel he played the music on the inside. [ inaudible ] >> you guys ask for a plan -- >> hold on, hold on. hold on. can we have one speaker at a

time. commissioner lee, did you want to finish your question? >> i want going to say, we need the data. it's not complete. and if you want us to make a decision on this, it's not correct. >> mr. montoya's correct. last time we were here, you asked what was going on with the neighbors, 1k we responded. you said you need a plan, and 100% of the external doors are finished, complete, and there's an internal door that's 90% complete. >> sir, if you want to watch the tape again, i specifically asked for data. >> yes. >> so if you want to go and say i did not, it's incorrect. and you can rewind the tape, and i asked for data, okay? actual data. so telling me what i said is wrong. >> we've got data. you've got -- >> it's not complete. >> it's not what you want.

that's why i'm asking for specifics. i would love to work with you guys, and i just need to know what exactly it is that you guys want so i can get that done. >> so a couple of things. one, i think it's challenging where you come in and say well, there's a report but it's not finished yet, and we're doing soundproofing but it's not finished yet. it would be helpful if you say here's a report, and it's been finished, and we can take action. it's difficult for us to take action when the reports aren't finished. and commissioner lee has been very consistent about his desire to see some of the data specifically around the noise. so i appreciate your frustration. that's very clear, and we want you to be back in full

operati operationas soon as possible. so i think finishing the reports that are in process, finishing and completing the work that's in process, and then, coming back is what we're asking for, instead of coming in and saying things are almost done. i'd also like to hear from other folks who are here to speak on this issue, as well. so are there any other final questions from the commissioners? >> i just want to add one note. it goes back to something that director weiland said. we are accustomed to a very specific set of data. they're reports that are easily obtainable on-line. i'm sure the director has a number of these reports that we

can share with you. that's what we're accustomed to getting. it's very kind of standard operating procedure. so when commissioner lee says he wants data, i'm thinking, and i could wrong, but it's we want to see the data that we usually see with these complex reports that third parties put together. >> copy that. so the report -- kevin's report needs to be a different report under a different guideline, as far as the study goes. the data of the study, that needs to be complete. >> they take measurements of sound, and then, they analyze that. today, we've already seen a couple. >> can i say one thing? i respect your position and commissioner lee, as well. i understand it's clear, and it's clarity here. what happens when the data come in, and the diamonds say hey, still noisy here? i don't like it. my kids can't sleep. i don't like it.

what happens? what do you do about him and her? >> i'll leave that as a rhetorical question. >> yeah, it is. >> it's what we do all the time. >> let me make it specific. what if that in fact happens? >> so can i just give it my opinion because i've been here on that side of the track before. >> yes. >> if you do everything physically possible, provide us the data, spent the money on soundproofing, done everything possible by the book, the diamonds can file whatever they can file, but you're in compliance. as long as you're in compliance, you're not getting anymore tickets. this commission can only do so much. >> you've answered my question. >> that's all. it's not about -- i mean, other things can happen, but at the same time, when it comes to impacting neighbors and noise, which this is the issue right now, it's done. >> okay. that was my question, and you've -- i respect your answer. >> all right.

so thank you. is there -- are there other people here to comment on this? san francisco police department, are you here to comment on this? do you have input on this decision? welcome. >> steve matthias, central station. i would respectfully request that i be able to speak on different issues if the hearing is going to be presented at a later date just so that the issues are fresh and can be presented at the same time. >> yes, that's fine with us. we'd certainly like to have your input at the same time as everything else, but you're also welcome to make comments now, if you'd like to. >> i think i'll let the public have their time. i know that they have a lot to say, and -- but yeah, i think

i'll address the other things. i think it would just be a better package to be able to do that. >> right. great. thank you. >> thank you. >> members of the public who would like to comment on this? yes, please, come on up. we'd like to have three minutes perperson, if possible. >> thank you very much, commissioners. my name is andrew diamond. you've heard my name mentioned a lot this evening. i live at 2 roland street, which is across the alley from hue night club. i first moved there in 2007, before there was ever a night club at hue. i met bennett at some neighborhood meetings where he told me he was going to be a good neighbor. i was in support of the club. i love the community. i've lived there now for 11 years.

i've heard some disparaging things about me said. i will just say, i will be the first to come in front of you and say when i don't have thump, thump, thump, coming through my walls at night. and even though you put the 12:00 restriction on, they still play music after midnight, so we still get that thump, thump, thump, coming until 1:30, 1:45 until they shut their music off. that's all i care about. i know there's security issues. broadway's a tough place. everybody talks about roland, and everybody talks -- i'm really concerned about the volume going up. at the back of the alley, it's actually really very quiet. it's not like being out on the broadway the cars are going, so this bass music just cuts through everything. i've spent over $10,000 soundproofi

soundproofing and taking apart my walls, covering my windows that face roland street to try to decrease that issue. we bought our condo before we had kids. we'd like to live there forever. this is really a solvable issue. there are nights that hue is operating, and i don't have a problem. it's great and i love it. there are nights that they go overboard, and all i'm looking for is a solution to what i think can be solved. we've had countless police officers, entertainment commissioners. mr. pauli, sean burke has been in my home. dr. matthias has been in my home. abc has been in my home. everybody can hear the music. you can come to the back of roland street at midnight and hear it. it's not like this is a mystery issue. it's there, and i'm really appreciative of everything the commission has done because

it's actually gotten better since last july. things have started to get better, and if it could just get fixed, we would be in heaven. i wouldn't care what hue was doing because, you know, it's just frustrating because they've known about these issues for so many years. bennett was in my living room eight years ago. i've met with him many, marijuanmany times. this is an e-mail. we've bought our own sound meter, and this is inside our home where the sound just bounces about between 70 and # 0, the bass hits; it just goes right up. and that's what i'm hoping can get solved, and i really want to thank everybody for their help on this. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is garth smith. i'm a homeowner and resident at 2 roland, as well, a neighbor to andrew diamond.

it's a pretty simple issue here, it truly is, about a large part of noise and security. both of which have improved dramatically since our meeting last june, where there were many people to express their concerns. as andrew indicated, we've met with mr. bennett over the ten years he's been there. he has indicated he was there to be a good neighbor. he tends to be a procrastinor. for example, in june of last year, obviously, his operation permit was modified primarily because of noise. it's been six months now, and this insulation noise barrier has just been installed within a week. and the reports to show the

improvements aren't even put together yet. so the point is, all we want is the noise down to a reasonable level, and it hasn't been there. it's getting better, and we think it is a situation that can be solved. we just need somebody to put some effort into it, do what they say they're going to do. and we have nothing against the operation. it's -- we know it's broadway. we live there; we own property there. it's just an unusual -- or unreasonable condition at this point. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is dominick lamandre. i'm the district manager for the top of broadway cbd. it's good to see you. this is the third time i'm

going to submit a comment on this issue. what i will say is that it seems that benity came here today to ask you to make a decision based on incomplete information. we brought this issue to the entertainment commission back in june 2017, and then subsequently went to the appeals board on june 20, 2017, and there were some stipulations laid out in that ruling that bennett has to follow in order for his case to be reviewed. so he comes to you with 90% of it done, and my question is, this has been an issue that we've been dealing with since february 2016, and he comes to you today to make a decision based on work that has yet to be completed within that two-year time span and asks you to bank that extra time on his good word and on his good

faith. and at this point, bennett hasn't shown any good faith in the neighborhood. i've been trying to have a constructive dialogue for over two years now. only recently he's started responded to my e-mails, and it's a one way dialogue that doesn't promote conversation when only one party responds. nothing else to say except i would be very worried about taking bennett at his word. i've tried to cash that in many times, and i have yet to see any results. so thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment? all right. then public comment is closed. commissioners? >> well, obviously, you know, we should continue this, but maybe with maggie showing some samples of sound studies that we usually look at, get all the soundproofing and everything

all done, all done to the best you think to your ability and then bring sean out there and do the check, you know, like we normally would do, but i'd like to -- >> you may want to stipulate that in terms of you want sean to do a new sound test, and if so -- >> i think he kind of wants to work with sean and all this, but i want to make sure -- 'cause we're not anybody's personal sound person. we want to get it resolved, but i want to make sure that the -- the place holder has all -- everything done, have those -- those things for the door in, everything done, have jordan's paperwork all done, all the data ready to come to us so we can finally make a decision. and i guess at the time i want to know what's sean's findings

are. >> i'm happy to send sean ought ought -- out to do monitoring. it's a little bit out of the ordinary, but you want him there as they're doing testing? >> in my opinion, i think it's better that sean's with them with their people so that -- they're saying that he's taking readings at different times than they take readings. i mean -- >> sorry to interject. i don't want to be contrary, but i think -- i think it would be necessary to send me out if what we were talking about is an increase in their internal sound limit or an adjustment to what ambient is, and i think that's maybe not what's on the table here. i think what's on the table is they need to -- >> well, they're saying that

they're in complains. neighbors say they're still having problems skbl they have have -- >> they have an opportunity to fight the ticket that was issued -- that's not true. actually, the ticket has been paid, but they still an opportunity to appeal that. >> i think right now they're asking some guidance. >> happy to do that. >> so before they come back to us, we want all of their data complete, and maggie can show them -- they don't have to go so extensive, but give us some points of when they took the data, at what time, where they were at; a little bit more detail than a paragraph or a report. i want all their witnesses to be here, kevin, and everybody who's going to testify for them to be available for us to ask questions. and you say their standards when they take their sound

check and your sound check, and if you say it's different than what they have, then, we can bring that up, too, i guess. >> okay. sorry. i don't want to go on too long here, but i want to make sure that this is -- this is clear. you're stipulating that i have a role in them -- >> i'd like to verify -- >> the process prior to them -- >> i'd like you to verify what they're claiming that they're in compliance, okay? like, i want you to take the same reading -- is it possible to take the same reading? >> i think that might encourage a situation in which there's a difference of opinion actively on-site in the moment, and i think maybe that's not the best course. >> yeah. i don't. i think inspector burke's job should be to offer guidance and to help them to provide the data that we're requiring with director weiland.

i would personally not assign or try to assign him to something way outside of his -- >> help them out, let them get all their data. >> well, to me, it's a very legitimate concern they're bringing up. you want something. help me to tell me what it is, and i think between inspector weiland and director burke, they'll be able to do it. >> do what you guys got to do, what you guys think you're in compliance, and inspector burke will take his own readings, as he would do with any other poe. >> but that's the thing we need to clarify, commissioner lee, because if we're sending sean out to be doing readings, what are the parameters for that? sean's role for going out and doing readings are to a, set a limit or b, ensure the readings

are within the limit. he's not going out and doing 24 hours of data or information that you're used to seeing. that's separate. if you want him to skbrust go out and oversee the process, have a -- lending advice on what's going on, that might be a separate thing. >> yes. and i don't know -- speaking for myself, i do not think setting the limits is the way to go on this. >> i think it's compliance. >> ensuring compliance. >> they can supposedly legally work out of that. if they say they're hitting that same limit, but they're still hearing it in the back, then, there's got to be something wrong. >> i think the sound study will just be interesting and curious to see what are the levels that we're hearing in the alleyway based on the soundproofing they've done. >> all right. so are you guys okay with just the data?

>> and to have that -- the final piece of the soundproofing put in place before the next meeting, that small little check box of their -- >> okay. so i'm waiting -- i'm not going to be having him set any kind of a new limit. >> no. >> especially because it's that at ambient right now. >> i think i'd prefer to hold off on that. >> okay. so he will just be, like, an expert witness to help out. is that -- >> so mr. bloom, so you understand, before you come back, please have your compliant have everything ready to present, and they will give you the guidance of what they're looking for. we can just talk about -- there might be other issues, but let's get the sound thing out of the way so we don't disturb a neighbor that obviously doesn't want the business to go down, but let's establish a

kind of mutual understanding. >> that's okay, no, no, no. no worried. >> -- no worries. >> all right. so i have a motion to continue. >> motion to continue. >> with all the data -- complete data from whoever experts they have, and all their witnesses here. and if you can't make it, then skip -- skip the hearing where -- especially the sound people can be here. >> so are you asking for a motion to continue it and when they're ready, they're contact our director and ask to be calendared then? >> yes. >> february 6th. >> okay. >> yep. >> all right. so that's a motion. >> i'll second it. >> and a second. >> so just for clarity's sake, within that motion, are we also -- 'cause you didn't list within your motion that you wanted a recommendation from an

expert that includes data. and you also had mentioned that you wanted -- or commissioner bleiman had mentioned that you wanted the soundproofing to complete. so are those two motions to continue? >> yeah. >> yes. >> all right. and then a vote. [ roll call. ] >> all right. thank you, everyone. and thank you for your patience on this item. our final item is commissioner comments and questions. yes? >> just one thing. i think a lot of us down here understand what the tones mean when people come up and talk, but sometimes people that don't come down to city hall much don't understand that there's two tones, so when we talk to

them, maybe we can kind remind them, you'll hear the two tones, 15 seconds left. >> that's the only thing. i hear people starting to get uncomfortable and starting to hurry up. >> yes. thank you. useful to remind me of these things. any other comments or questions from the commissioners? >> are we doing the rdr changes of the -- the lighting? >> my bad. i mean -- >> data. we don't have to keep repeating it. >> i still think -- skbl is that somethi that -- >> is that something that you guys want to have in another offline group. >> i think we should discuss that in our yearly retreat, just so everybody can get a little more informed on the kind of questions we can ask. >> we can make the changes in that kind of a setting. >> i would love to have an rdr