2000 marin is a clear possibility at this point, and all i want to say is that whatever can be done by this body to make that come to pass would be much appreciated by our floral community, all the vendors, all the florists, and all our customers who rely on us for beautiful flowers. thank you so much. >> vice president melgar: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. very good to see the timer's working. so two points that i wanted to make on behalf of local 2 and also on behalf of the we are soma coalition, of which local 2 has been a part since its inception. from we are soma, you've heard some of what we are soma is asking for in terms of mitigation and impacts of the plan. in particular what i wanted to plastic bag for all of you is that the coalition has been spending a lot of time thinking through proposals and a plan for how to spend and allocate

the community benefits money that was proposed to come as part of the plan and we'll be sending a finalized version of that shortly, and also want to ask that the planning staff and department work closely with the city attorney and there's a really strong concern that the money gets spent on community services, and that those go to benefit the people of soma. as far as local 2, we have -- i heard conversation the last time that this plan was discussed about something such as a policy statement or something else that would sort of guide with -- guide a lot of the -- of the criteria with regard especially to large commercial projects, so i'll briefly read what we're proposing be added or amended to the plan as it exists now. so for all residential developments greater than 25 units and all commercial development, which would include hotels, greater than 50,000 square feet, require the developer to provide a community good jobs employment

plan for public review and comment prior to consideration of project approval by the planning department. it would detail the goals for all the permanent jobs within that proposed development for hiring disadvantages community members, especially south of market and central soma residents, at living wages with good benefits and workers' rights, and it should detail how those requests will be met by details concerns of community, civic, and labor organizations. so that's what we're preparing and submitting for your comment and inclusion in the plan. again, this is a fairly major, major plan. there are probably literally billions of dollars of additional value being created by the plan, and we really want to make sure when that is being proposed, that it goes towards jobs that are good family sustaining jobs that will allow people to remain in this community with dignity. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please.

>> commissioners, andrew juneus with reuben, juneus and rose, and i'm glad we're getting close to the finish line. 900 market rate units, 270 offsite affordable units i'm here to talk about a technical issue as some of my associates are from the firm. i want to call your attention to the transportation to management program that you guys enacted last year, and specifically the grandfathering provision that was in that piece of legislation that we have on the books right now. of the adopted last year that took care of the projects that were in the pipeline. unfortunately, the legislation that you have before you takes that grandfathering out, and we're not sure why. it's really critical that that grandfather stay in for large projects like the creamery. you know it's really tough. it's a new program. we really haven't seen it

applied to virtually any project, much less a large project, and it doesn't scale well with a large project. we've had these conversations with the staff, as the director knows. but let me back up a little bit again. it's new. we were he table, the developers were at the table talking about this, which is why the grandfather's in there in the first place. the idea started back in 2015. in 2016, you had several hearings, 2017, the board adopted it. but again, we're at the table. the grandfather is not perfect, but it works for the large projects that have been in the pipeline for quite sometime, and the staff has already acknowledged this. when cory teague sent a letter to the land use committee rite back before the adoption of the ordinance, it was clear there was a simple fairness issue like all grandfathering provisions raised. you can't pull out the rug out from big developers, lots of commitments, lots of decisions made, and then, you can't

change the rules. of course at the same time the tdm was rolling in track one, central soma was rolling in track two, and we're not quite sure why the two tracks weren't talking together, because you know frankly, at the same time when cory wrote the letter and basically talked about the big projects that we're going to have problems with this and why the grandfather was needed, many of those big projects are in central soma. we're not sure how this happened. i think it might just be an oversight. we're very sure that this is a simple fix. we're looking to the staff to redirect the grandfather that's basically in the code. in other words, in central soma, let these large projects be treated like any other large projects in the city. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. melinda sargepour, reuben,

june juneus, and rose. we are strongly supportive of central soma moving forward and appreciate the staff's efforts in preparing this extremely detailed zoning package that is before you and will be considered over the coming weeks. however, one area that needs attention is usable open space for residential towers in the area. the plan is applying traditional eastern neighborhood requirements to central soma, which are 80 square feet for dwelling unit private or 50 square feet if publicly accessible. this requirement works in the eastern neighborhoods, which typically contain lower rise development on larnler parcels. it gives you more space to accommodate them. however central soma is going to have some towers on up to 40 400 feet, and on that scale with many hundreds of units,

those height requirements don't work. the downtown, which is scaled for commercial c-3 districts, has a high comment. that's achievable for towers, and should apply for central soma. the high area here is hard to achieve due to the plan's proposal to impose an in lieu fee that's about double the fee that applies in other eastern neighborhood districts. to illustrate the issue, a 900 unit project in central soma would have a 72,000 square foot requirement for open space, which is a very large figure. with a high end lieu fee, it would end up triggering a $9.5 million fee, so very high. this was an informative impact fee that was intended to generate revenue under the plan. came as a surprise to developers under the package, and it wasn't in the financial analysis. this is an important issue, given the desire to maximize housi housing in central soma. unless it's corrected, this

could make it infeasible for key sites to provide the residential towers that we're counting on, so this would impact projects like the creamery, which is currently anticipated to create up to 1200 units of housing in the plan area and nearly 30% bmr's. to help residential development move forward, we're asking the commission and the department to amend the residential open space requirements for central soma tower development so that they're consistent with c-3 standards and allow the developers to meet some portion of that by providing popos. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. tear asullivan from reuben, juneus, and rose. first, i want to thank steve and staff with all the effort he's put into the plan. he's taken many calls on the minushae of the code, so thank you. we've gone through the code that was introduced on march

1st line by line and all the proposed changes. in your packet, exhibit 3.6 as well as letters from our firm have some details of code specific issues that we hope you will take a look at over the next few weeks. i just want to raise two issues specifically. the first one is regarding tower separation in sections 132.4, and this is on pages 23 and 24 of the code legislation that you have in front of you. the tower separation controls establish the minimum distance that towers can be from one another. for projects in the central soma s.u.d., they have to have a separation of 115 feet from one another. if a project's unable to meet these distances, they can seek an exemption through a large project exemption from the planning commission, however for projects in the central soma s.u.-d the planning commission can only grant this if all four criteria are met. these are very difficult four the large development sites to meet. if you recall there are eight key development sites in the

plan, and these are large assemblages that are clustered together. most are going to have to ask fore an exception. however the exceptions themselves are very strict. you have to have a minimum of 85 feet from another tower, a floor area of a tower can't exceed 10,000 square feet, there must be a difference of 50 feet in height between the towers, and that's including those that are on the same site, so most developments will not be able to meet this, and they will not be able to get the exception, so we ask that there be an exception or language be added to section 329(a) that would allow the eight development sites to seek exemption under that section. and the second issue i wanted to raise is on page 85 to 89 of your packet. section 329 generally for every other site in eastern neighborhoods

neighborhoods as well as the central soma s.u.d. has a list of recommendations that they can ask the development for. the way it is drafted, only those eight exceptions apply to the large sites, so for example, open space, exposure, rear yard, all of those are in the one through 11 and are not enumerated or allowed to be sought by the key development sites. so maybe just a very simple draft clause in addition to the exceptions one through 11, one through 12, above the key -- the above eight available to the key development sites. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. skbr good afternoon, commissioners. chloe angeles, also from reuben juneus and rose.

thank you for taking the time to hear all our comments today. i first want to say that we're strongly supportive of the plan overall and really appreciate the tremendous staff effort to put forth this really detailed plan. i first want to echo the comments made about andrew juneus about the grandfathering clause. second, i'd encourage staff and the commission to take another look at maximum parking provisions for wholesale and distribution uses. if the plan is going to encourage p.d.r. uses, particularly large scale wholesale uses like the flower market, we need to ensure that the plan provides adequate parking to serve those kinds of uses, and as currently written, it doesn't. i also want to address the see kites exceptions that tara mentioned. the plan identified eight key sites with the intention of providing greater flexibility for those sites, but the provision only asked the key sites to ask for a specifically

limited number of exceptions. this means that the biggest projects cannot pursue the pud exceptions normally available to the eastern neighborhoods through the pud process. the only way for them to obtain flexibility is through a variance or by amending the code on a project by project basis. the central soma plan encourages a novel mix of uses, requiring or encouraging a mix of pdr, office, retail and residential while striving for dense, walkable and transit oriented neighborhood. to achieve these goals, staff has proposed a detailed design and use regulations. central soma needs the same flexibility -- central soma projects need the same flexibility to ask for other minor construction standards including all the others that projects in the eastern neighbored are eligible for. it is crucial that the

commission be given greater discretion to modify standards as it considers the unique needs of large sites with complicated mixes of users, like the flower mart project. that said, we ask that section 329(d) be amended to allow the planning commission to retain its discretion to grant pud type exceptions to the central soma project, including the key sites. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> todd david. i am not with reuben, juneus, and rose, but i'm always looking for a job. so just wanted to talk really broadly about central soma. you know, and i think this isn't just central -- what i was going to say it's not just central soma. this is just a reminder because we think about it a lot, we talk about a lot, the basket of costs that's going into building things in central soma. and so we have, as we've said before, right, the raw material

cost of construction, labor cost, you know, financing cost. we have impact -- you know, large impact fees and -- that are great because they're going to give a lot of community benefits. and we have a fairly high inclusionary, so those are the baskets, something that we need to think about. the other thing that i think unfortunately we're going to see in central soma, we're going to see some abuses in soma, ceqa, lawsuits, we already know that residents and buildings that are already complaining about views and things like that. so it's just one of those things that once again, this is a process that i believe is eight years in the making, and, you know, when -- i don't know when we're going to have first shovel in the ground, but all of these things, it would be great if we could figure outweighs to move these forward in a little bit of a quicker fashion and maybe discourage some of the abuses that perhaps

an eight-year process should be able to have dealt with along in the eight years. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. laura clark here for another informational hearing. so i just want to say once again, this plan is signing us up for a lot of jobs growth, and it doesn't seem that we have any plans in the pipeline for corresponding housing growth. the planning department does not have any plans -- area plans in the pipeline, and that is not a failure of the planning department, that is a failure of the planning commission to not direct them to prioritize this. additionally, the neighborhoods that were put up by the planning department as potential neighbored ahoods art equity. they're just talking about doing more development in the

bayview, talking about doing more development in the excelsior? where is the west side in this conversation? where is glen park in this conversation? where is quite frankly st. francis wood? the market is indicating to us that we should be putting housing there because their property values are very high. we should listen to that. wherever there are high property values and good transit, we should be up zoning, and there is no reason not to be doing that. we can't just keep asking low income communities and the former industrial zones where obviously there are toxic waste problems to be taking on all of the density that this city needs to do. we need to be doing more on the west side. we need to up zone noe valley. many more apartments could go in there, and i wouldn't have had to leave. we can't just be pointing the finger at the south bay which has historically been just like us in adding a lot more jobs

and not corresponding housing. we cannot just be comrepplicit this jobs housing. minneapolis, they're considering fourplex housing citywide. there is no reason for us not to. i understand this plan is moving forward quickly, there are things we can do to mitigate it, to make the housing be built faster, but additionally, we should all be worried about the blue condo owners. it seems to be one guy who has the penthouse who doesn't want to lose his view, who is going to be doing a ceqa lawsuit of some kind. we need to be thinking about how even the housing that is accounted for in this plan is at risk. thanks. >> mr. elberling.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. richard elberling. the assumption of the central soma plan is that the city job programs are good enough. they're not. they are really not. they're strong on construction but when it comes to the permanent jobs, they really do not get much results. and especially here where you are intending this to be a technology industry district with all the office buildings. the permanent jobs are in -- in the tech industry are crucial to have a really effective job program for city residents and community residents. the twitter tax break programs of central market were a miserable failure, just admit it. we have to do better this time. second, i want to make sure

you're aware of the great importance to we are soma, and the community advocates that we have a broad based wide ranging purview citizens advisory committee for the south of market including the central soma, but all the eastern neighborhoods south of market that will essentially replace the very inadequate eastern neighborhood cac with regard to soma. this is a top priority for us. it's not in the package of measures that you continued today. it will be a separate administrative code amendment. the department has not proposed anything to the community, nothing, no specifics. and it's loanguishing. but believe me, this is equal importance with everything else you're doing because we know very well that promises are one thing when you all vote for a plan, but five years, ten years down the road when things actually get done, money actually gets spent, developers actually have to do what they

suggested years ago they were going to do, if the community is not watching, and it's not empowered with a genuine advisory process, it fails. it turns out to be b.s. now as you might expect, not seeing that the department is not moving ahead with this, we are now working with supervisor kim's staff to draft that administrative code language. we are going to obviously review it with our community first. we would be glad to talk about the department staff about it, as well, if they're willing. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. any additional public comment on this item? okay. with that, public comment is closed. commissioners? commissioner richards? >> commissioner richards: so i thought, while i'm wasting my afternoon sitting through another central soma presentation, i think it's my tenth, but actually, i got some

information here, and i do have some questions, so actually maybe this was a good waste of my time. mr. wertheim, the missing millions, the $80 million that we talked about last time that was yet unassigned, can we come up with some recommendations on where we go? >> yes. we assigned it out last time i presented to you exactly how the 70 million would be spent, right, so if memory serves me, there was 25 million towards social and cultural programming within the 25 years, basically, to keep funding soma stablization in perpetuity because that's about to run out, there's 25 million to fill a gap because the yerba buena facility can't figure out how to fund their facility. on the other end, we have about

6 million peryear for bessie carmichael. about 20% of the kids are from homeless families, and 100% are receiving free or subsidized lunches, so we work with the school district to fill that gap. there's about 9 million towards neighborhood cleaning services, that was about maybe 300 or 400,000 peryear that was requested by supervisor kim to help keep the neighborhood clean. and then about 600,000 peryear towards maintenance and upkeep of the new parks and recreation, and that was what we provide, so that's a full preview. >> commissioner richards: perfect. do we have a sequence of projects that are logical and would meet the allocations that keep coming up in october or i guess the free square footage? >> i can't believe 15 hearings and that's the first time that's come up, but yes, congratulations. >> with we will have that for you. >> commissioner richards: okay. great. i don't need to know, i just wanted to make sure, because i

heard validation, but we've got a project that we need to manage through. this tdm issue, was it an oversight or was it real? >> maybe some other answer to those two questions. hey, josh is there. you want to answer this? >> commissioner richards: the reason i ask is when mr. junius said i think this was an over sight, josh went like this. >> this tdi issue falls into the plan of grandfathering generally, and the plan was taken an approach that projects that are not allowable under the existing zoning regardless of when they are filed should meet the current standards that are in effect when the plan is adopted, at which time these projects can be approved under the zoning at that time, and that if despite the fact that some of these projects submitted applications some

time ago in anticipation of the central soma plan coming in, they weren't available at the time, so they haven't avail themselves of the rules that were in effect at the time. >> commissioner richards: okay. so no cherry picking. we want the zoning, but we don't want the requirement -- okay. i get what you're saying. >> yeah. so that's the general approach, and that would apply not just to tdm, but across the board. >> commissioner richards: this tower separation issue, is there anywhere in the city where below 85 feet is allowed? >> i don't think there is a tower separation limit in c-3. richar >> commissioner richards: okay. >> so there are various rules in the city. there's obviously a limited number of places where we have tower separation rules. in the c-3, the tower separation rules apply just within your own property, and there are set back requirements above a certain height of the street wall, generally about 100 feet, and they start at 15 feet from your property line

and increases as it gets taller. >> commissioner richards: that because it's mostly commercial office space? >> those were set in the # 0's during the downtown plan when the area was primarily commercial. and so as we did the subsequent plans where there was much more residential like rincon hill and transbay, after lot lots of study about what makes a living residential neighborhood we settled on 115 feet, and that's what it is in rincon hill and in transbay, it's actually more than that. >> commissioner richards: are there any areas in that plan, rincon hill, etcetera, where it falls below 85 feet? >> 85 feet? no, that's the minimum rich. >> commissioner richards: so it can go below 115 with special criteria. >> yeah. >> commissioner richards: what about the open space issue that was brought up by the reuben junius people, the 80 some feet by the -- >> so they're correct in the

downtown, the open space has 36 square feet perunit, but if i could dive in again to the rincon hill plan, the requirement is 75 square feet perunit, which is very similar to this one, which is 80. and those -- and all the projects in rincon hill, under the plan that came in after the plan was adopted, in sf said 75 square feet perunit requirement, there are creative ways to meet that. it's not all in the form of balconies and roof decks. they're allowed to do off-site improvements and streetscape requirements, and in rincon hill, we're in satisfaction of the open space irpt kwoos. >> commissioner richards: we also heard some some of the we are soma community around some additional things. i don't know if they'd go through the city attorney because they sounded like they might not actually be legal. we sat here last time and said

hey, go engage the community one last time, so can you tell me what the results were there, what happened that one last time around the track was? >> i reached out to the community after putting the packet together because that's where my mind was the last couple weeks after the hearing, the person that directed the hearing, and she directed me to annette gomez from local 2 who you heard the request specifically from labor there. i have not heard another request how the dollars would be apportioned. sounds like we have a couple more weeks. >> commissioner richards: like with the jobs. >> yeah, you have a jobs piece and we put a policy in the plan specifically to supporting good jobs at your request. >> commissioner richards: and it's in there. >> mm-hmm. >> commissioner richards: okay. the cac as a child of the market octavia plan said hey, you're not going to hoist this plan on us even though we

helped write it because after five or ten years, we're all going to be gone. we want a cac to make sure the implementation on what we were supposed to get we actually get. so i do support a cac on the central soma plan. what are your thoughts on that. >> yeah. we brought this idea to you as something we would like to see happen. we thought -- they're already eastern neighborhoods, so you're already in a cac, you would split the three districts and have them split. we aftoffered that deal to supervisor kim's office, and they said yes, but then one of her staff took a leave of absence and we haven't heard anything since. >> commissioner richards: if i could on that issue, just to clarify, steve, central soma's part of all of -- it's part of

the all of eastern neighborhoods. it's the intent to have a cac that's separation from the other eastern neighborhoods and the dogpatch. >> yes, and we took this idea even brought to the eastern neighborhood cac and asked them what do you think, and all the neighborhoods across the cac thought it was a good idea. it would increase their participation and the refgs. if you ask someone in soma about open space in dogpatch, it wasn't as visceral, so there wasn't that response to create -- richar >> commissioner richards: okay. a lot going on. i think that's it. thanks. i think folks in the community, if there are things that you want us to consider beyond the already declared policy things that you indicated that were important to you, get them to us so that we could in the next

round of this actually talk about what they are, make sure if they're questionable along the line of legality, that you make sure they're legal, that we don't waste time talking about they are if they're not legal, but i'm open to them. the other thing, one last closing because we're kind of on the end. the folks from reuben junius had me on saying hey, it's this way, but you've got to do it that way. the cherry's went on in my head and said hey, you're cherry picking. you didn't want the parts of the eastern neighborhood plan that didn't benefit you, but the other parts, you did. i'm a little confused, mr. junius. it looks like staff has kind of made a lot of decisions on these, but i'm open to more conversations with you folks and with staff. >> if you don't mind, you have

a memo. we got a lot of information really right at the end. it was too much to consider the follow out comes of those, so i basically made a document called issues for consideration in your case report such that we can make sure that they're vetted with the presumption that today at the adoption hearing we didn't want them to be considered. now that there's extra time, one of my goals is to vet these considerations and bring them forward so that the packet that you have the next time around will have a lot of these considerations. >> commissioner richards: thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you, commissioner richards, mr. wertheim. commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: the eight development sites, that it would be clarified, as well. it's very, very difficult to understand when you first take on the complexity of the project. >> i just wanted to say it's nice to have somebody reading the project besides me.

when you write 619 pages of code or whatever it is, mistakes are going to happen. one of the things that they brought up for example is that the key development sites wouldn't be available to avail themselves of the other flexibilities for sites on 329, that's not our intent. the intent is to have sub section(d) still apply and then sub section(a) as e as a wholer flexibility. >> commissioner moore: so we would be able to track these questions are answered. >> sure. we have the action consideration memo today. you know every time we make changes there's a memo that said changes have been made. my goal would be just to walk everything that's different between the package that you received the first time out and later, and obviously be as transparent as possible, because trying to find the changes in the code is ridiculous, so instead have a memo that says if you want to compare, here's what's different, and the rational. why i always do that in the presentations i gave you is

what's changed and why it's changed. >> vice president melgar: commissioner koppel? >>. >> commissioner koppel: if it's 115 feet of separation, what are we looking at as of now? >> tara sullivan, reuben, junius and rose. i'm speaking to one development site, but it also applies to other sites. the key development sites are very unique, almost in the city. they are very large parcels with two to three to four buildings on them at times, and so often times, it is 75 to 85 feet, give or take, and it's also -- i mean, this is really getting into the weeds but how midrise tower versus a tower is defined, and you want to scale it around, but it's a combination of the heights with the definitions and the tower separation, and those eight particular sites are very

unique compared to everything else. thanks. >> commissioner koppel: just in general, i'm open to looking at the more granular details when we hear this next time, and definitely in favor of the good jobs program. really happy to see the sustainability district going forward and really in favor of expediting approvals if developers are willing to commit to what is asked for as far as tenant protections, worker protections, prevailing wage, skilled and trained workforce, but not just intentions to do these -- these commitments instead of intentions is what i'm getting at, and really looking forward to getting this right the next time. >> vice president melgar: commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i want to make a comment on tower separation. it is not just first come, first serve, and the second party which would be affected by the ruling basically ends up

with nothing. i've always asked department to look at it in a creative way because if tower separation has a reason, and i do believe it does, then i think it is a creative solution looking at both or other sites in context with each other and what is possible, rather than one way or the other. >> vice president melgar: commissioner richards? >> commissioner richards: two points. i think last time when mr. delgado got up and said there is two sites right next to each other, we said we'd kind of like staff to model these out. i think we're open to making things work. >> thank you. we -- we modelled it out, we just kept it very brief today. we can show you that model next time. i think there's two sites in question with tower separation issues. one is a development with two towers, and so they're worried about the relationship between the towers themselves at a key site and thus would unenabled

under our intention that they wou wouldn't have to stick the intentional requirements, but again we'll check with the zoning administrator and make sure that's the case. the other thing you've heard is there's two sites right next to each other, and they're just totally abutting each other and that becomes a real challenge for them to build. they'll basically have 30 feet between the two of them, and that would be a difficult point richard richards i think mr. wu mentioned a lot of things that you mentioned in your public comment, we would like to see it as well so we can see what it is that you're asking for as policy. >> vice president melgar: yes, somebody needs to make a motion, yes. commissioner koppel? >> commissioner koppel: motion

to consider certification of the eir until may 10 richards second. >> clerk: thank you. commissioners on the issue of the motion to consider certification of the eir until may 10, on that motion -- [ roll call. ] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 6-0. >> vice president melgar: that's it. so with that, the meeting is adjourned.

>> hello, everyone. we got new microphones. kind of sounds louder. i'm going to call this meeting to order. welcome to the april 3rd meeting of the san francisco entertainment commission. my name is brian tan. i'm the commission president. a few things that we go over before we get the meeting started. if you're a member of the public and have comment come up to speak when i call it. we also have speaker cards at the fronted where you can fill and hand to our staff who'll hand to me. you'll be first. second, thank you to sf goff tv and media services for bringing this -- recording this and airing this live to the public and finally, if you have a cell phone, please turn that off or

put it on silent so we don't interrupt this meeting. we'll go ahead and start with roll call. [ roll call ] >> all right. we have a full house. first item is general public comment. this is for business that relates to the san francisco entertainment commission that you do not see currently on the agenda. is there any public comment someone would like to make? all right. seeing none, it's closed and move on to item number two. i do have a request to continue this item as the minute have not been prepared. so can someone please move to continue this to the next meeting. >> so moved. >> second. >> all right. moved by commissioner thomas. secteseconded.

let's take a vote. [ roll call ] >> our next item is item number 3, the report from our acting director. it is going to be right. >> i didn't have anything to really get into this evening, but if you have any questions for me, let me know. >> great. is there any public comment on our acting director's very, very light report? seeing none, public comment is closed. move on to item number 4. he's not here tonight. >> he's absent this evening. >> on to item 5. police department comments and questions. is there any public comments or questions? move on to item 6. very quick first half of our agenda.

so this is hearing impossible action for our permits. i had a request to take the one item on the consent agenda and put that on the regular calendar. so let's go ahead and move and hear this item on its own to stand on its own rather than vote on it as a consent item. >> just as an intro to this item, this is limited live performance permit. this is for kawika's ocean beach deli. it's super close to the beach by the safeway there. he has amazing coffee that you should check out. he brings it straight from kona. he's hoping to have live performances a few nights a week until 8:00 p.m. because that's when he closes his business. the only reason we're taking it off consent tonight is due to the fact that the pd

recommendation needed to be updated. they have limited the days to friday to sunday just based on the original application, but the applicant would like to include thursdays as well. the permit officer for the station had no issue with that, but his captain happened to be out of town today. so he couldn't formally change his recommendation. so for that reason, we will bring up the business owner, david knottage, to give a little overview of his business. >> can you bring that microphone closer to your mouth? >> thank you for hearing me today. kawika's ocean beach deli, we doll a deli with big britches. we are a community hub, serving

great coffee and a lot of other things. one of the things that we want to add is acoustic live music, all original music. no covers. well, have to. i choose not to pay b mi, which i'm very aware of. we are also doing poetry readings. we have an intellectual happy hour. our music includes b1950 jazz, hawaiian music with hula dancers and a mellow rock and roll group. we limit drums to brushes. we don't have any -- we try to -- we keep the windows

closed. you can't hear it from the outside. i have a letter -- i don't know if you have a copy of it -- from sandra. she's in full support of this. at the same time, i provided 89 signatures from our residents that live across the street. so if you're facing -- if the windows go out, these folks are residents across the street. there are some that are from the neighborhood in support of what we do. customers that come in and generally love everything that we're doing. our hours for this would be 4:00 p.m. we actually close at 7:30. on the permit, i put 8:00 just in case we went over just a little bit. i have to apologize for the one error, which maggie said, is that originally it was friday through sunday.

we do have a few events on thursday. monday through wednesday, nothing. we close super early. we're within -- we're within the noise abatement of 10:00 p.m. officer bryant from the richmond police was in support as long as we comply with his items, which i am more than happy to do. we'll be providing a calendar to them. i was talking to them about a live calendar so that things can be fluid. you know, generally we want to bring culture and have a good time. with the increase in minimum wages, i'm trying to be creative. trying to bring customers in. trying to have -- we're so close to ocean beach. we're trying to provide entertainment for those that are at ocean beach, to bring in new people. i think that's about it. i thank you for your time.

do you have any questions for me? >> commissioners, any questions? sounds pretty straightforward. >> it is. it's very mellow. we're just trying to -- we're just trying to have a good time, you know, and abide by the laws. >> that's what we like to hear. commissioner perez has a question. >> thank you for coming in. did i hear you say you have intellectual happy hour? >> yeah. >> okay. what does that en sale? >> it's a -- it's called our think and drink program. well, we had to call it something. because we have an alcohol license, we -- that's part of the tie-in to this, is that we want to serve beer and wine. no hard alcohol. this program is for -- well, as an example, my wife is a brand

new health coach dealing with autoimmune disease. she does a functional forum once a month, and that helps people in the community with al owe appreciate a, hashimotos, a whole bunch of different autoimmune diseases. we have psychics, card readers that come in. it's basically people that want to read books, that want to -- i talked to a westboun web design. come on in. let's do a think and drink. we had solar city come in and talk about their products. to the community. i ended up buying from them. does that answer your question. >> kind of like ted talks with beer. >> yeah. >> got it.

>> that's the idea. maybe chips. >> now, in case there are some issues or complaints from your neighbors, what would be your general policy and how do we solve this complaint? >> so the building that we're in is a section 8hud building. already older residents. there are younger residents. there are multigenerationals that live in this building in the apartments as well. a lot of the 60s are from those residents. they are not -- most of them are not english speaking. even the building manager signed this, that they absolutely love it. now, if there's any kind of an issue, i would be more -- i'm more than happy to talk to that person, you know, and discuss it with them as long as they're

reasonable. if -- as an example, you have a person in the same building who sings at the top of her lungs that i can hear from my deli and she's down at the end of the block. we close all the windows. so we try to do the best we can. my ceiling tiles are acoustic unless there's a building leak and i have to take them out. we always try to put them back and keep them there. we try to do everything that we possibly can. >> thank you. >> you're very welcome. >> i have a question. >> do it. >> can you explain to me the sound system you're using? you say small portable speakers in and a board. >> we have a -- we have a small

lighting system which has a light board. there are two spotlights so we can dim everything down, all the lights dimmed down. the sound system is fully monitored. i usually sit next to it. it is a basic plug-in for acoustic guitars. we have two microphones, usually those are used for speakers so that the community that we are in is older. people sometimes cannot project their voice. so that's what we utilize that for. >> how many watts is your amplifier? >> reporter: the speakers themselves are, i believe, 100 watts. but i'm not 100% sure. we -- i keep it way low. >> the speaker is self powered? >> yes, sir. >> okay. so the --

>> the sound board has a high, medium, low, and it has five channels. we run our radio through it during the day. occasionally, when there's a giants game like there was today, we'll run the giants game through those speakers. but even during the day, when those are on, you can't hear anything. >> okay. >> i'm always there for the events, and i monitor the thing. if it gets over, we -- there are instruments that are louder than our sound system, like the saxophone. >> yeah. we don't usually do a sound check on something small like this, but neighbors start to complain, then we'll probably have to, you know, do some kind of limitations so you know -- because even these small ones

are loud. >> there are ten lines. we don't go over the third line ever. >> okay. all right. any other questions? if not, you can have a seat. i'll open it up for public comment. thank you very much. is there any public comment on ocean beach -- sorry -- kawika's ocean beach deli? seeing none, comments are closed. commissioners, what would you like to do? i'm assuming we would like to move to approve. >> do we need to add thursday? i would like to make a motion to approve the limited live permit with the addition of thursday evening. >> with the police conditions with the addition of thursday. >> yes, please. >> okay. >> second. >> all right. let's take a vote. [ roll call ]

>> the motion passes. good luck. we will move on to item number 7. the action to change the conditions on ec1377 place of entertainment for halcyon. >> okay. so we have brought halcyon to hearing tonight. we haven't had them at hearings since last year, june 20th, 2017. i wanted to bring them here tonight. the main reason really is because there is a condition on their permit that you all placed on the june 20th hearing that is unenforceable essentially. if you turn to their permit,

i've highlighted it. it's essentially the condition that reads entertainment shall be restricted to 4:00 a.m. daily. they are allowed to extent until 6:00 a.m., a maximum of 12 times per calendar year. unfortunately, that condition does not stipulate the permit holder would have to provide a calendar of events listing when those 6:00 a.m. events occur. this was at the time when joselyn was still director. i was instructed at that time to reach out to ms. milano to obtain a calendar of events which we never received a response. i did try several times to have that provided to us, but, again, it wasn't a requirement of the permit since that was not stipulated there. so we definitely had a few quiet

months there where we weren't receiving a whole lot of complaints about halcyon. then they started to ramp up again. you'll see text messages in your files and e-mails from neighbors chronicling some of those complaints. i don't feel like you need to refer to the time line. the inspector put together a time line. that's indicative of events relating to halcyon since june 20th of last year. on there, he does list about 30 complaints over the period of time since that hearing occurred. that's essentially reporting that to the commission. you've definitely heard of those complaints over the months in his reports. then what else do we have here? i did try to have ms. milano in

my office to mediate on that one condition of going to 6:00 a.m., but she did not want to meet in person. so, again, i think another reason just to include the commission here this evening regarding that. i think just the volume of complaints, it seems to have ramped up again. you'll also see in your file there's three citations there for sound violations exceeding her decibel limit of 116. that is the internal limit from the dance floor. so that has been exceeded. it happened once in november, twice in december of last year. let's see. what else do we have? i have spoken with the neighbors. it looks as though several of these complaints are coming in after 4:00 a.m.

that's something to note. i've been told that ms. milano is not totally responsive to her neighbors. one other note about the citations from inspector burke, those are all unpaid at this point. >> dating back to -- >> november. >> the last three. >> yeah. >> thank you. >> we have a representative here tonight from supervisor kim's office that i think needs to leave early. >> great. let's hear from supervisor kim's office. >> commissioner tan, commissioners, not here on a pleasant note, unfortunately. but when constituent issues conflict with the interest of small business, that is where the supervisor asks staff to get involved and make statements on her behalf.

i think i will start out reading some information that i was able to find out. first and most basic, halcyon is an adjective denoting a period of time in the past that was happy and peaceful. those days of the mid 1980s when prophets were soaring. idealic, carefree, joyful, joyous, contented. thriving, prosperous, successful, serine, calm, tranquil, peaceful. what difference could an extra hour of sleep make in your life? maybe quite a lot. studies though that the gap between getting just enough sleep and getting too little sleep may affect your health, your mood, your weight. if you're getting less than

recommended 7 or 8 hours of sleep each night, here are 9 reasons why you should shut down your computer, turn off the lights, and go to bed an hour early tonight. number one, better health. getting good night's sleep won't grant you immunity from disease, but study after study found a link between insufficient sleep and some serious health problems such as heart disease, heart attacks, diabetes, and obesity. better sex life. according to a poll conducted by the national sleep foundation, up to 26% of people say their sex lives tend to suffer because they're just too tired. there's evidence that in men, impaired sleep can be associated with lower testosterone levels. the exact nature of the link isn't clear. less pain. if you have chronic pain or acute pain from a recent injury, getting enough sleep may actually make you hurt less. many studies have shown a link between a lack of