been supporting the 30 right now campaign for well on over half a year now, and we are urging the board and all of

the -- in half of the c.a.r.t. budget proposal. the youth commission actually just yesterday voted unanimously to support that proposal to divert funding from the -- and urge the board to fund that proposal this year to the maximum extent, and thank you for your time and that's my comment. >> clerk: thank you. commissioner click, for your comments. okay.

operations, let's hear from the next caller, please. >> hi, san francisco board of supervisors. my name is stan [inaudible] and i'm calling from oakland. i'm a former san franciscan. it's where i got my education at the san francisco school of law, and i wanted to call and comment and urge the board to uphold and support the resolution to affirm san francisco's commitment to recognizing the armenian genocide. from my understanding, the last step of a genocide and the on going step of a genocide is genocide denial, and that's what the armenian community is seeing today, with turkey and azerbaijan continuing to deny the existence and events of the

genocide. that's important because azerbaijan today is [inaudible] and thank you, supervisor peskin, for proposing this resolution, and thank you to the board for listening on this very historic day. >> clerk: thank you for your

comments. thank you for joining us this evening. operations, do we have another caller in the queue, please? >> is that me? >> clerk: yes. mr. warfield, i'll set the timer now. >> thank you. this is peter warfield, executive director the library users association. we can be reached at libraryusers2004@yahoo.com. i wanted to talk about something more general and that is a sense of withdrawal of government being accessible by folks. one used to be able to go to

city hall and be able to access supervisor offices. whole range of offices, in fact, 40 hours a week. one used to be able to pick up a phone pretty much within 40 hours a week and call, and generally whether one came in person or called, there was some way to reach not only to reach the front office which could help direct whatever it was that a person was calling about or even individuals working their 40 hours at an office. with covid-19 since march of last year, those avenues of contact with the government have been shutdown completely, and we're often left with not even a sense of how to get in touch or when there might be a response. many offices simply say there's nobody at the office. we're working remotely, send us

an e-mail. lots of people don't have e-mail. i recently called recology, same thing. used to be able to call them, talk about something and settle it right away. now they said send e-mail. lots of people don't have e-mail, and of course, at the library, they focus on problems for people who have computers. >> clerk: thank you. to the members, i'll state, in our office hours, you can calculate hours over the last year that we've worked with mr. warfield, so we're happy to state that your board of supervisors and clerks are working on behalf of the public. operations, do we have another caller? >> operator: madam clerk, that completes the queue.

>> clerk: thank you. mr. president? >> president walton: thank you. public comment is now closed. madam clerk, would you please call items 23 through 36. >> clerk: thank you. items 23 through 36 were introduced for adoption without committee reference. a unanimous vote is required for adoption of these resolutions today. any supervisor may require any resolution to go to committee. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: item 29. >> president walton: supervisor preston? >> supervisor preston: item 23, please. >> president walton: supervise stefani? >> supervisor stefani: item 30,

please. >> president walton: madam clerk, would you call the roll for items 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31, 32, 33, 34 -- [inaudible] >> clerk: excuse me, mr. president. can i ask operations to mute the excess noise, please. >> clerk: so on items 23 through 27 and 31 through 35 -- [roll call]

>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: thank you, madam clerk, and without objection, these resolutions are adopted and approved unanimously. madam clerk, please call item 28. >> clerk: item 28 is a resolution to support california state assembly bill 257, authored by assembly member lorena gonzales of district 80, to enact the

fast-food accountability and standards recovery act, legislation that would empower and protect california's 500,000 fast-food workers. >> supervisor mar: thank you. colleagues, yesterday, i attended a rally to set industry wide health and safety standards and hold corporations accountability for keeping workers safe. we heard from women workers at mcdonalds about repeated and blatant failure by managers failing to follow covid-19 health measures, resulting in several women testing positive for covid-19. and even before the pandemic, fast-food workers have been endured rampant workplace

violations and uses, including wage theft, sexual harassment. a.b. 257 would also require corporate fast-food giants like mcdonalds have the resources they need to operate safely and in compliance with the law. i want to thank assembly member lorena gonzales for sponsoring this legislation and the cosponsors of this legislation, supervisors walton, chan, ronen, and safai.

thank you, colleagues. i urge your support of this resolution. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor mar. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: mr. president, i'm for item 29. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor peskin. supervisor melgar. >> supervisor melgar: i just wanted to be added as a cosponsor. thank you. thank you, president walton. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor melgar. madam clerk, please call the roll on item 28. >> clerk: on item 28 -- [roll call]

>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: thank you, madam clerk, and without objection, this resolution passes unanimously. madam clerk, please call item number 29. >> clerk: item 29 is a resolution to designate april 24, 2021, as armenian genocide commemoration day in the city and county of san francisco and urging president joseph biden to formally recognize the armenian genocide and the san

francisco board of education to reaffirm its commitment to teaching the historical facts of the armenian genocide in our public schools. >> president walton: thank you, madam clerk. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: this is a resolution that i've introduced every year that i've been on the board, but what's changed is other than we have two new members on the board than what we voted last year, in july and september of 2020, we had two armenian hate crimes in the city and county of san francisco, one of them the arson fire at the armenian cultural center, which

subsequently mayor breed and many of us attended in solidarity with the armenian community as well as the armenian school on brotherhood way in district 7. what's changed is our newly elected president of the united states has set forth a commitment to finally formally recognizes the armenian genocide, and if we do not acknowledge and embrace that history, we are destined to repeat it. having said that, colleagues, you are all in possession of a small nonsubstantial change, a provision that states, whereas the california department of education includes the armenian genocide in its history, so i'd

like to make an amendment to put that recital in on said page at line six, so i'd like to make that motion and then would like to pass it as amended. >> president walton: there's a motion to amend. can i have a second? [inaudible] >> president walton: motion to amend, seconded by supervisor safai, and we will take that up after comments. supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: yes, thank you, supervisor peskin, for your continuous advocacy, and please add me as a sponsor. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor ronen. supervisor melgar? >> supervisor melgar: thank you, supervisor peskin, for introducing this resolution and for having consistently supported this cause to bring

attention of the world and for the last 14 years of introducing resolutions. yet to this day, there continues to be a continuance of denial by the turkish and azerbaijan government that this ever happened. we have seen the vandalism and the hatred and how that has caused fear and insecurity for the community and for the kids who attend the armenian school and their families? our places of refuge should not be places of fear, and we must consistently condemn these acts, and we need to remind ourselves and remind the world that this kind of hatred will continue to rise if we don't at

least acknowledge the mistakes and the terrible things that have happened in the past. defending human rights is not only a global issue but it is one that we must embed locally. this sunday, the armenian association of america bay area chapter is organizing a protest to acknowledge the lives lost in the genocide but also to instill recognition of the resilience of the armenian people, and thank you, once again, supervisor peskin, for your continued support of the community. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor melgar. supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you, supervisor melgar. very well said, and thank you,

supervisor peskin, for ensuring that we're shining the light on this armenian genocide. many of the armenians in san francisco are armenian-rahns, and they could not defend against the many atrocities that happened over the centuries. very proud to support you, supervisor peskin, and the city and county of san francisco, so thank you. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor safai. supervisor stefani?

>> supervisor stefani: thank you, supervisor peskin. as you know, we were in district 2 at the church after the arson, and we all came together and united in support of the armenian community, and i just want to thank you for continuing to advocate, and i'd like to be a cosponsor for the resolution. >> president walton: supervisor peskin, if you want to get back on the roster, i would certainly accommodate that. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. i received a message that it's on saturday and not on sunday. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor haney? >> supervisor haney: thank you, president walton. supervisor haney?

-- denial also has its continued persecution and trauma, but as folks have said, we still have acts of discrimination and racism against the armenian community in san francisco, and i would love to know when that event is so i can come and join you, as well. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor haney. supervisor mandelman? >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, president walton. supervisor, would you add me as a cosponsor? >> president walton: thank you, supervisor mandelman. supervisor preston?

>> supervisor preston: thank you, president walton. i think my staff has already taken care of this, but if not, i would like you to add me as a sponsor. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: yes. please add me as a sponsor, as well. >> president walton: and i would like to be added as a cosponsor. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you and sorry for the interruption, mr. president. the commemoration is actually saturday, not sunday, at 1:00 p.m. at mount davidson. >> president walton: thank you. madam clerk, please call the roll. >> clerk: on item 29 amendment -- [roll call]

>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: thank you. without objection, the item is adopted unanimously. >> clerk: the amendments, mr. president. >> president walton: yes, thank you so much. the amendments are passed unanimously. now the roll call on the resolution as amended. >> clerk: on item 29 as amended -- [roll call]

>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: and without objection, this resolution is adopted -- this amended resolution is adopted unanimously. madam clerk, please call item number 30. >> clerk: item 30, this is a resolution to recognize the month of april as earthquake preparedness month? >> president walton: thank you. supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thank you, president walton. colleagues, before you is a resolution declaring april earthquake preparedness month. as many as 10,000 earthquakes occur each year in california,

and the purpose of this is to encourage everyone to take mitigation measures that will save lives and minimize community hardship. it's important to use opportunities like earthquake preparedness month to look at what solutions we can implement. california is the first state in the nation to offer free cutting edge technology designed to alert californians before an earthquake is felt. technology solutions will provide users with a few moments before shaking can be felt to take protective action to protect their homes and their families. the events of this last year

made very clear we don't know when quakes will strike. i was getting my second shot at the produce market, and i was looking at how the capacity for one disaster builds the capacity for the other disaster. two days ago we commemorated the 115 anniversary of the 1906 earthquake. i want to thank my cosponsors, supervisors mandelman, chan, preston, haney, and mar, and i hope you will all join communities across california in recognizing earthquake preparedness month. thank you, president walton. >> clerk: mr. president, i believe you were muted, sir. >> president walton: my apologies. thank you, supervisor stefani. madam clerk, please call the

roll. >> clerk: on item 30 -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: without objection, this resolution is adopted unanimously. madam clerk, please call item 36. >> clerk: 36 is a motion to approve final map, number 10674, comprised of lots one,

two, and three, each a three residential unit condominium project, located at 215-2166 hayes street, being a subdivision, and to adopt the appropriate findings. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor mandelman? >> supervisor mandelman: let me just start by recognizing that maps are administerial acts of these items. the project site is located on hayes between schrader and cole street in the panhandle next to the haight-ashbury. the site was occupied by two

three-story medical office buildings constructed in 1957 that totalled 17,850 square feet in size. the buildings were cleared of all the service providers, demolished, and in their place, three four-story residential units containing three units in each building for a total of nine units were constructed. one of those units was the haight-ashbury psychological services, called haps. for years, they operated out of 2166 hayes street, providing low cost psychological services to those in need. haps was a fixture of the haight-ashbury neighborhood.

the clinic worked with up to 15 interns from masters and doctoral programs from schools all over the bay area, with each internal carrying a caseload of eight to ten clients. in a neighborhood where we know too well the need for more services, haps was crucial in getting the people the mental health services they need until 2016 when they were broad sided that the owner intended to demolish their facility and replace them with condominiums. they ended up on geary boulevard, well outside the neighborhood that they served for nearly 40 years. and it's not only haps. the property was home to a number of other nonprofits, including substance abuse counseling programs, marriage counseling programs, a pharmacy, and other

neighborhood serving entities. long before i became supervisor, the property owners received city approval for their plans. they demolished the buildings and built the project that is here before us today. at this point, the nine luxury condominiums now being built, and in a place where vulnerable san franciscans once received low fee psychological treatment and services, one can now purchase a condominium unit for between $1.9 and $2.6 million, which is what each of these units is on the market for. not a single one of these is below or at market, and there will be no services offered at this site, even on the ground floor. this continues years of scaling back the safety net infrastructure in my district by driving out service providers by haps.

it's something i've been working hard to change, and i will just say if people wonder why, and many do, so many people suffering from serious mental health illness and addiction are on the streets, they can look to this site and the elimination of these critical neighborhood services. we desperately need these services, and yet city hall stood by despite pleas for help from the tenants operating out of these buildings and allowed those who give services to those in need to be banished and demolished and luxury housing built. colleagues, i have reached out

to public works and look forward to meeting with them and would like to move to continue this item to our next regularly scheduled board meeting on april 27. >> president walton: okay. do we have a second? >> supervisor peskin: peskin, second. >> president walton: seconded by supervisor peskin. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: i was just going to say, i've been through this administerial rodeo one time, and i think we can second it, so let's do it. >> president walton: thank you, supervisor preston and supervisor peskin. we have a motion on the floor to continue item 36 to next week's meeting on april 27, seconded by supervisor peskin. madam clerk, please call the roll. >> clerk: on the motion to continue item 36 to april 27 -- [roll call]

>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: and without objection, this motion carries. madam clerk, please call item number 6. >> clerk: item 6 is the emergency ordinance for the enforcement of workplace ventilation standards for covid-19. >> president walton: thank you. supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you. i'll be very brief. we have heard from parties that are still at the table.

finally, some additional progress is being made, and i'd like to continue this item for one more week. >> president walton: second, supervisor safai -- was that a second, supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: yes. >> president walton: motion to continue made by supervisor safai, second by supervisor peskin. madam clerk, can we have a roll call vote? >> clerk: on the motion to continue item 6 to april 27 -- [roll call]

>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president walton: without objection, this motion passes unanimously. madam clerk, i see we don't have any imperative items. >> clerk: that's correct. >> president walton: do we have any in memoriams to report? >> clerk: mr. president, i have no in memoriams to report. >> president walton: thank you. i will end with this little quote. telling oppressed people that they don't face racism is

[inaudible] this meeting is adjourned. >> clerk: thank you.

[please stand by]

>> thank you, good job. >> hi, robin. i want to commend and you city family for doing an excellent job of a lot of times people think that we're too slow but this is a situation where there was a problem and we solved it and it makes me proud to be part of the city family to witness how we were able to create a solution for our city to support business and i have to say i really appreciate the anecdote you share around humanizing a lot of the different experiences and the data and so, i'm always going to forever remember the

and shared spaces and it's one of the silver linings coming out of this pandemic and it will help san francisco be a world-class city and thank you for making sure that equity is a big component of that and giving businesses a better chance to recover. if there's any opportunities where we as a commission can help assist in that effort, i think we're all big, big supporters of the program. >> thank you. >> i don't think you need to hear how excited i am over this.

to transform our city and this commission, you know, we're working with a number of particularly community 2,000 new park lets and give or take, right, 2,000 places where musicians and artists can be paid to perform and do their work through the ver might program and they didn't exist before and that is a big problem in the city and it's not that we didn't have people wanted to perform, there was nowhere for them to do it and to it's amazing. what are the next steps? is it land use next? can you just repeat it and i don't think you did. >> yeah, thank you, president. i should have the slide. that outlines all that. so, we're currently in a round

of information als visiting commissions and other bodies and updating them on the status and the provisions of things and we're at planning commission this thursday for an informational we will be at the m.t.a. board on the fourth of may and they'll adopt resolution connected to transportation code and it will go to the land use data actually, land use committee hasn't been finalizes and in so all things go well, and we should see the ordinance adopted passed by the board of supervisors before the end of may and this puts the effective date before the end of the fiscal year and the fiscal year is kind of a key date for a lot of our planning and

implementation, so, all the the plan is to have all the provisions in place before the year commences. >> let's just say hypothetically, you had a few hundred business owners that wanted to have their voices be heard and advocate on behalf of this. you don't weigh into the political side of things but land use and the board of supervisors are the place to go? are there particular areas where people would (inaudible). on the record, i'm just curious. >> president, did we lose you. >> president bleiman: am i back? >> i don't know what you were saying. that's funny, i was wondering why everyone looked at me so weird. can you hear me now? all right.

so i was saying, let's say we had a few hundred business owners who wanted and fans of shared spaces that wanted to advocate for this and show up, are there any particular places that they should go to have their voices be heard that would be most effective? >> yeah, that's a great question. well, this is why we have a legislative public legislative process so the adoption hearings are where you know, our legislature listens and takes public comment about things they're considering enacting so a date as well as land use and board hearings is finalized, that will be posted to the web. shared spaces future and if folks go there now, they'll see

that this commission hearing as well as other commission hearings that we've scheduled are listed with links to the agenda, the log in details so the public debate and discourse belong and they're scheduled at the board. >> thank you, ok. anymore questions from commissioners? all right. is there any public comment on this agenda item? >> there nor hands raised and no comments in the chat. >> we're going ahead and close public comment. robin, thank you for taking the time. i do think this will (inaudible). amazing so thank you again for coming. >> thank you, president.

i look forward to hearing all the kind words and i'll pass that on. >> president bleiman: moving along, is item number 6, which is the presentation on the small business of the proposed recovery act. and i believe oh man, are we in for a treat tonight, this is exciting everybody, guess who is coming to talk to us. it's mr. ben van houten. let's get him in here! [laughter] >> we're bringing him in right now. >> you sound like a game show host. [laughter] >> he is back! >> good evening. ben from the office of economic and workforce development here to provide some thoughts that will not live up to that level of introduction but hopefully,

i'll get close. i have a slide deck for everyone. is that working? awesome, so i'm here to present the small business recovery act tonight to all of you. this is a real eve significant and broad piece of legislation that touches on different areas of small business support. i'm going to walk through some of the high-level goals of the ordinance and then talk about some of the different, a number of different aspects that the ordinance touches on and there are pieces of it and so i talk about what i think is most relevant to life and entertainment. so the goals of the small business recovery ordinance to further cut bureaucracy by

building on previous successes and really they're most squarely we're talking about the really successful work and the voters' strong approval of proposition h last november which has a number of streamlining components that are really positive stories that we want to continue to build on and to enhance flexibility for small businesses to adapt their business models both right now during the pandemic and also into the future and to provide protections and opportunities for entertainment and cultural establishments. so, in terms of cutting bureaucracy, building on proposition h, this ordinance would guarantee that permits for prince pee permitted businesses on the ground floor would be those permits would be approved within 30 days city wide. so prop h focuses specifically on the neighborhood commercial districts and this would expand that 30-day process to the

groundfloor storefronts city wide and part of doing that would mean further eliminating neighborhood notifications requirements that currently applies in the eastern neighborhood mixed use districts building on prop h easy limb eliminated notification and expand access to expedited use. for several years there was a planning department process to enable different types of businesses to receive expedited conditional use hearings as many of you know, i'm sure, the conditional use authorization process can often take a business owner six months to get a hearing and the expedited process, to guarantee the hearing within 90 days and that process was a planning commission implemented process for a number of years and it became codified and it would be

on ex pa dieted and it's one of the relatively small number of storefront uses that does not currently have access to expedited conditional use and bars would have access to this 90-day conventional use process. it's important because often times, for small business owners, just the prospect of having to go through the conditional use process is an incredible disincentive and the idea of having to pay representative for six months or more just to find out if the project can move forward is really just incredible barrier facing our small businesses. other elements cutting bureaucracy in this ordinance would eliminate the abandonment clause for non formula retail uses so for spaces that might be hard to tenant for the currently

there's a three-year abandonment clause, abandoning the prior use that was established for that space. this would eliminate that. this would expand on proposition h's reforms around outdoor areas and so expanding this would expand it to the roof tops with year beyond and commercial activity outdoors and it would remove tense decalculations for formula retail and simplify a number of planning definitions as well. they would expand flexibility by allowing for accessory dwelling units to be built in the rear groundfloor of special space and requiring and maintaining that feet of depth for the retail storefront allow catering businesses so right now limited

restaurants and cafes, bakeries, can have catering businesses operating within the storefront expanded to full service restaurants as well and with flexibility for our businesses. there are reforms supporting arts and culture so i think scheer where everyone has been most of my time in terms limited live performance permits there are a number of police code reforms performed in this ordinance to extend the standard permissable hours of llp permits to 11:00 p.m. and the current time is 10:00 p.m. on a permit but that can be petitions to 11:00 p.m. and this would make 11:00 p-m. the default and not require that petitioning after year of operation. they remove the entertainment

per miss requirement for a solo, unamplified performer where that performance ends by 10:00 p.m. inside a business. to create new opportunities for musicians, for poetry ratings that is still beneath a threshold that would justify having a life performance or place of entertainment permit and i don't think that this exception would eliminate the need for those permits and it's a fairly narrow performances ending by 10:00 p.m. but i do think there's an opportunity here to expand access to entertainment in retail spaces and other types of businesses and provide a launching pad potentially for businesses to eventually seek an llp permit based on some successful small scale. this with key eight a 60-day

limited live performance permit for entertainment with pop-up retail which is a temporary use under the planning code so there's a vacant storefront and a pop up retail temporary use authorization and they could access a 60-day live performance with their authorization so creating new opportunities for entertainment in vacant storefronts or other under utilized storefronts and additionally the ordinance would enable the entertainment commission to approve one-time event permits beyond the limits on one-time event permits and we've seen incredible demand for and opportunities for outdoor activities and over the past year and there's a real opportunity to have more frequent outdoor activities and more flexible activities that

removing the cap on one-time event permits would help facilitate. the ordinance would require a continual use to remove a nighttime entertainment use for the next three years and this is different. creating new opportunities to incorporate arts and culture into our businesses and this one is about protecting these venues during a time of uncertainty for these spaces and this is an item that was identified by our venue advocates as a important policy piece for them as they navigate these really uncertain waters over the next several years. it would legalize nighttime entertainment uses that have been operate ing their required permits for 10 years and there's been a number of cases over the last several years and in terms of trying to assist new business owners taking over existing

entertainment venues and the history of approvals and the permit history on in terms of land use is a little bit unclear and this would provide certainty to long standing venues and to perspective new operators of longstanding venues to ensure that continuity moving forward to keep doing. it could last up to two years to provide tool in the toolbox to support outdoor entertainment. and finally, the ordinance would remove due public tive findings needed in the planning code where nighttime entertainment use needs to condition use authorization to reduce barriers while still preserving the planning commission's ability to condition permits through the c.u. process and i just threw at

of information out there in a relatively short period of time. i would happen to take questions or discuss this further. >> president bleiman: questions? >> hi. first of all, this is all music to my ears and for a long time, a big proponent of cutting our red tape streamlining the bureau bureaucracy. my question is about the change in terms of not requiring a permit for solo unamplified performers. i love the idea. i'm wondering why it is such a narrow exception though, especially if we're looking at it from a nuisance or sound

context. i don't see how three people doing a poetry read asking different from one or you know, one person is playing an acoustic guitar and one person is singing unamplified why that would change the neighborhood impact? >> thank you, commissioner, that's a -- thank you for the kind words and i'm glad that this resinates with you. it's a good question. in terms of trying to find that balance, without trying to avoiding getting too granular into this specific scenario is ok and this specific scenario is not and i think one artist unamplified where was we had landed by you are not alone in terms of the feedback that we've hard where others have said it would be great to have two or three people, i think, i would be happy to have more

conversations about that piece testify and i think ultimately, honestly, would i really welcome the perspectives of the commission and staff on this given the potential impacts that had he might have. if there's a way to narrowly taylor something and then i think that's really interesting and if there is not, one might be a good step in the right direction that for now that is the sort of best we can do under the sort of the limits of the code. >> if i could, just interject, then, that was really thought out. that presentation was incredible. thank you for providing all of the information and doing the work and commissioner wang, i just wanted to say in terms of staff response to that idea, when ben reached out to me with this specific piece of the legislation, my thinking was that it would be challenging to

regulate anything beyond that and it would have some unfairness to current limited live performance holders who commonly have two or three person group, feeling why are they allowed to do this without a permit and without costs, yet i have to abide by this and at the same time, too, certain instrument and performances are much louder so if you are using drums and you are using saxophone or an instrument with you are getting into amplification so that was my thinking around that that one performer could not cause that kind of a problem and this would help accommodate for open mics

and stuff. >> if we were to instead use a decibel level or limit it to one instrument, versus one performer that it would just be too difficult in terms of. >> i mean, that's potential. maybe, it's just that you would then need an agency to regulate that des bill limits and it doesn't exist outside of us and that is already problematic for stuff that we don't regulate and the other part that i flagged for ben when i had the same initial reaction was just that you -- sorry, i lost my train of thought there. it will come back to me, sorry. >> thank you guys for the very thoughtful approach and i know this is all gone through a lot of deliberations to make things as stream lined as possible.

other questions? >> ben, can you give us an idea on the timeline as well? >> that's a good lesson for next time and i'll try to block my way through it. the planning commission this thursday for discussion. i'm not actually sure. i will have to circle back on the calender for land use and beyond and i'll be sure to circle back to make sure that you all are kept apprised of those dates moving forward.

>> it came back so i can just go back to that for a second. we can't limit the type of instrument so i don't think we would be able to say you can't have horns or you can't have a specific type of instrument so that was the only type of thing. >> and i just remembered, which is to say i was just informed, that the ordinance will be historic preservation tomorrow and planning on thursday, and land use some time in earlier or mid may. >> awesome. couple more things, i just wanted to spell or help to dispel some myths about this that -- i have only heard from a couple people who they point to just a couple parts of this. does this mean there's a baron every rooftop on san francisco, ben. >> no, no. >> yeah. people immediately go to that part of it and they freak out

and they think, i live in a quiet neighborhood and now there's bar in the pizza place. i want to think how that's limited. >> a couple of different ways. number one, bar uses are not eligible under the -- it's following the same approach that was in prop h for back patios which and to the rooftop, as well. >> and then the other one is, well, actually that's the only big one and can you just explain the formula retail is not just opening up. formula retail all over the city for every place, right.

it's very specific in terms of enabling expedited access to conditional uses for formula retail under, formula retailers that are on the small side of formula retail. >> i always wondered where they got the number 11 from. it was strange to me. i can't think of a single, giant evil company that has 13 locations and they're like got 'em, you know. i thought they could have put the number around 500 and it would have been ok. all right. any other questions from commissioners? seeing none. can we open it up to public comment. >> i'm checking right now there are no hands raised and i do not see any chats in the comments.

>> i do have another question. >> go for it, please. >> is there broad support for this? what is the initial support level for this look like? >> that's a great question. it's been received positively and col tease have been doing a lot of out reach to stakeholders all over the city to help understand this really is technical stuff but impactful and i would love to have a performed answer there but a positive feeling, how about that. >> thank you. optimistic. all right. thank you, ben, really appreciate it. you know, this is a wonky piece of legislation but i just want to point out how this has the

ability to truly transform salt of our entertainment between this and shared spaces there's an incredible amount of changes that are going to effect the ability to have live music and performers and just bring art back to the city so this is a lot of little things but toke they are really significant so i appreciate the efforts of ben and maggie experience else. >> thank you, thank you all for the opportunity to talk about this tonight and thank you to our colleagues at the planning department who have done a lot of the work on this ordinance and to the mayor's office for her leadership on this. >> president bleiman: now we will move on. we are at -- all right, so now

the next item agenda is 7 which is discussion and action to support the proposed shared spaces and small business recovery act legislation. i believe director wile len will discussion action on these agenda items and they're extremely significant for the state of entertainment in san francisco and i think we may want to consider getting on the record about them now because they have the ability, because they directly affect our per vow and what we do and it's right in our wheel house. that's my preface, thank you. >> thank you, president. thank you to dillon rice, who put these together for us so, this is very similar to the letter that you all sent in

support of ertf's recommendations which included shared spaces becoming permanent back in december. so same formula here. what i sent your way that is in the google folder is a draft letter that you all can send and i'll be sending on behalf of all of you with a vote if you want to vote in supports i would list as in favor on this letter and below that you will see that it's in reference to the recommendations that we sent your way last week to review and why we as staff and review of these ordinances or how you can support them and why. why they're in line with our goals as a commission and department and in line with the economic recovery task force recommendations. and so they're really spelled

out in here and if there's anything that you want to change, you can do that now. you can make a motion if you feel good about the way it's written. i leave it up to you. >> president bleiman: yeah, so i read it with a fine tooth comb and i was impressed by it and it looks great and i don't usually do this but i would like to make the first motion to approve it as is. >> second. >> president bleiman: before we vote, i want to do two things, do commissioners have comments on this? ong. and then we will open it up to public comment.

do you want me to show the slide one more time as a courtesy? >> please. >> ok. >> stop sharing. and i'm checking the queue and there are no hands raised and no checks in the comments. all right. in that case, we are going to take a vote. >> so you need to unmute. >> sorry about that. >> clerk: [roll call vote] >> president bleiman: it is so

moved. i'm proud of us for taking this stance. i think these things are amazing and a lot of the issues that have been thank you for humoring me and getting us on the record in support and i'm excited about that. next agenda item, we actually have some fun stuff tonight. number 8 is hearing and possible action regarding applications for permits under the jurisdiction of the entertainment commission. what! amazing! and i would love to invite you to introduce the items on the regular agenda tonight. >> you are so excited. >> we have a permit to approve! >> i know. we have many coming up. so, buckle up, commissioners. so this evening, we have only one permit and on the regular

agenda for a place of entertainment at lion's den at 57 went worth place. the applicants have done a lot of work to get to this point this evening including completing a c.u. to allow night-time entertainment at the premises and conducting extensive neighborhood outreach. they have also, i will note, received every single approval that they need to open with this permit as of tomorrow. which is incredible. all of their sign offs. they plan to have live entertainment at the venue including live bands and d.j.s as well as the other activities such as fashion shows and comedy acts. the business will be open seven days a week with the planned programs thursdays and through saturdays until 2:00 a.m. and during sunday brunch. so, in your file, you will see that there's six letters of support in there from chinatown merchant and community groups as

well as a copy of a letter the applicants mailed out to 195 residents and businesses in their surrounding area. there was no opposition for this permit. and central station approved it with one added condition that lion's den must maintain their currency occur tee system for all floors and video footage to be made available to both the sfpd and sf entertainment commission in the event of an incident. so, dillon, if you could, you are hear to speak with us tonight are calvin louie and cliff banayat and it looks like maybe one of you is a call-in? >> i just let in cliff and if louie is here, he can raise his hand. >> looks like cliff might have everyone in a room together.

ok. all right. you can unmute yourselves and i'll pass it over to you to tell the commission. >> can you hear us? >> yes. we can hear you. >> awesome. good evening, commissioners, thank you for having us today. my name is cliff and i'm basically an investor in the business and a managing member with lion's den select today assist with a p.o.e. process so i'm here today. with me today as well we have mr. calvin louie and he is a well-known business owner in chinatown community involved with several organizations as well and inside of chinatown and

that is why he is our community liaison and harry tom is our general manager with several years of bar and restaurant experience and most recently being a bar manager at the cafe house in chinatown as well. all three of us are here. i'll give you a little bit of history behind lion's den and we'll be opening up for questions. so, a little bit of history, lion's den was actually a club with a live band and performance in the 1940s and '50ing and so we took that on and made that a legacy community project to bring that back into the chinatown area and to be -- to be one of the first night life entertainment spaces to open in chinatown in over 40 years. that was a big project to take

on. the whole idea basic low behind lion's den was create a bar lounge, live band, d.j. performance, event space that it's not exist ant in chinatown so we were hoping to bring some night life into chinatown community. with that history in mind our goal was to create a modern day version of lion's den and create night life for the community and for people in san francisco to be able to come to chinatown and make it a destination spot to have a good time as well and chinatown has been overlooked as far as night life. a lot of people come to the city and they go to the mission, north beach, soma, and you no one thinks about going to chinatown and we want it to be a pioneer in over 40 years to try and create some night life in

chinatown. as far as community outreach, as maggie, director maggie said, we reached out to close to 200 neighboring businesses, tenants, owners, that were located within 500 feet of lion's den and that covered the grant avenue went worth, jackson and washington and so without any -- with no discrepancy and opposition as of today. we have on file, several letters of support from several local organizations such as the chitown mer much apartment association, be chinatown. ccdc, and the chinese chambers of commerce and all welcoming the project and happy to see

that we were bring some industry and fight life to chinatown. in closing, we wanted to do just that. bring life back to chinatown after dark. it does shut down after a certain time and no one thinks about coming to chinatown and enjoy some night life and we're hoping to bring that. i'm hoping with the success of lion's den, we would inspire other people from china to open businesses in chinatown as well. so, we wanted to follow footsteps in the revitalization of chinatown with following the footsteps of china live, mr. juice and now lion's den so we're hoping lion's den can do the same and keep that trend going.

with that i'm i'm asking for your consideration for approval tonight and we hope we can get that. with that, we're available for any questions. thank you for your time. >> hi, gentlemen, i wanted to thank you all for all the due diligence. you did the extensive community outreach and you have support and given what has been going on with our public-health crisis in the impact of small businesses in chinatown, and then this surge in anti a.p.i. violence it's really inspire to go see a business like this and especially one that's reviving a historic institution in the neighborhood and bringing back

visitors and residents to chinatown as a destination. i think it's much needed and i'm very happy to support this project. i would love to move to approve this permit. >> hi, this is dory. i want to echo everything that commissioner wang just shared. i think this is truly a victory to have you come in front of our commission today. especially with today's landmark verdict in the trial of the the murder of george floyd. you know, just thinking about what it means to experience justice and the fact that you guys are able to just really, truly do innovative, economic

recovery in chinatown making the streets of chinatown safe for residents and for a lot of returning generations of asian americans and also welcoming back the neighborhoods. i am happy to support and i would be honored to second the motion. >> president bleiman: any other commissioners? commissioner perez, do you have any comments? >> not at this time. thank you. >> president bleiman: i can't believe the hoops that you had to jump through in order to open this and i think we should be able to do better as a city for people just trying to bring entertainment to an area that hasn't. i appreciate you did it and having gone through processes not probably as arduous as yours but i know how frustrating it is

and how many steps there are and how much money it costs and for a place that has -- for an area of the city that is so historic and so important. not to have entertainment without spending years and thousands of dollars, it just doesn't sit right with me, i hope as a city, we can address that going forward. i appreciate you've done that. it sounds like you've done more than your share of outreach to the community and you are doing everything everything right so i'm excited about this and thank you for doing it and bringing performance back to that part of the city. what an amazing place. i think that hopefully the lack of performance there will also mean that there's a pent up demand for it in that area and so that is just an amazing thing. i'm going to open this up to

there are no hands raised and no comments in the chat. the motion is seconded so which can have a vote. >> clerk: [roll call vote] >> president bleiman: congratul. you have your purchase might. you are ready and please follow-up with our staff at your earliest convenience and they'll get with you for next steps. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for your time. >> president bleiman: all right. next agenda item is number 9, which discussion and possible action to adopt written comments and or recommendations to be submitted by the executive director to the planning

department and regarding noise issues for the proposed residential or hotel-motel project per chapter 116 of the administrative code and inser year inspector will introduce this project. >> thank you, president. the proposed project would build a four--storey residential three-unit townhome building. representatives of the project sponsor have conducted outreach with the one place of entertainment within 300 feet of the project. as shown in your file. the project sponsor and p.o.e. have had back and fourth around future sound complaints and the owners are in attendance and i believe and will be making some statements during public comment. and officials sound study is yet to be conducted but the project sponsor is take all steps for

proper sound a tin youation that we believe will lineup with the pending results, entertainment commission staff reviewed the project document and is recommending the following. approval with standard conditions for chapter 116 residential projects and the following additional conditions. the project sponsor must send the results from the required sound study to entertainment.commission at sfgov.or rg and antonio upon retrieval. here to present on bow half of project sponsor and answer any questions you might have is nick, the project manager. >> i'm going to let nick into the conversation.

>> nick, you are muted. >> hi, everybody. sorry about that. yes, we're the project sponsor. i am the project manager for the project. as antonio said, it's a three-unit building. i'm very, very experienced in the construction world. i used to be with len ar and we built thousands of homes in san francisco and we understand what it means to build to a 60 or better s. p.c. rating. and we are planning on doing that and we are very, very concerned and want to be good

neighbors with il pirata. we plan on using all of the typical techniques to get to a 60 and that includes double drywall, resilient channel and we'll use special windows, we'll be using quiet puddy, quiet rock, and quiet insulation and even quiet paint and calk and there are a lot of different ways to build assemblies so that sound won't resinate. one of the most important things was we put a one and a half inch space between the two buildings so the sound won't jump over that. like i said, we are extremely -- we want to be good neighbors and we want to build a very, very high-quality project. we use charles salter for many of our projects and we just

finished the golden gate park tennis center which is a very well known project inel gonegole and we worked with charles salter and many different assemblies to deaden and make sounds disappear in conference rooms and teaching rooms. so there was conference rooms, teaching rooms so long story short, very, very experienced in the construction business. understand how to deeden sound and i've been doing this for 40 years. we care. we want to make sure we build a good, quiet, building, not only for our residents, but for everybody around us. we care and we want to do what you guys want us to do. we will get a sound report. and we will adhere to it and i am certain that we can build a building that will be -- that will be righteous in the sound a

tin youation world. any questions, please ask. that's all. >> president bleiman: questions from commissioners? so, this is right near il pirata, is that correct? >> yes, sir. i'm not familiar with that place. usually we have like a diagram that we're able to see everything. let me just. >> we did give it to you in your package. >> president bleiman: let me pull that up. >> it's on 16th and utah. the il pirata is on the corner and we're the next lot up from il pirata.

the front door is on 16th street where our front door is up over on utah. >> president bleiman: got it. and can you just remind me how many units there are? >> throw. and are they going to be rental or condo? >> we haven't made up our mind just yet. it could be either. >> president bleiman: any other comments or questions? my understanding is there were people from il pirata but they're unable to attend tonight, is that correct? >> i'm not sure, sir. i do talk to sharon and her son but i didn't talk to them whether they would be here today. >> it looks like someone has their hand up. >> tony, does it look like anyone is here or are they not

coming? >> >> i am not sure. sharon is he just chatted and said hello. >> president bleiman: this is a great opportunity. this is not public comment so they're not limited by the public comment guidelines. >> i'm going to, john, i'm going to bring him to he can speak. right now. you are unmuted. >> can you hear me? >> yes. >> oh, excellent. so, i wanted to start off as saying, you know, we've been in the community since 1994. very vital part of that area, you know, we support comedians,

musicians, everything under the sun, very diverse set of events that go on there. some of our biggest concerns on the project sponsor form, that nicolas filled out, basic low the whole form was riddled with inaccuracies. it was incomplete and not accurate and just not true. so i just wanted to get clarity. i think we wrote in the letter to give you guys clarity on the specifics. >> antonio has given it to the board. has it been given? >> have you guys read through the documents at all? >> the document was submitted and included in the folder for

all the commissioners. >> yeah. >> we're very concerned that there's an outdoor deck looking right over our existing outdoor patio, which could be very intrusive, literally they're going to be sitting on top of people dining, eating, sitting there and we want to just really make sure that all these things are really thought out and it seems like at this point they really haven't been. we've wanted them to build some story polls and the footprint of how this is going to impact our back patio space and just over all, just communication to really make sure that this is going to be a good build for the community.

so il pirata can continue on being a vital part with all the events that we hold there. >> i just want to be clear here, our purview is around the entertainment side of things so we want to make sure that the project doesn't intrude on the ability for you to have live entertainment especially we don't want neighbors to move in who then immediately start complaining and want to shut down entertainment that's going on. we are not -- we don concern ourselves with areas that are not permitted for entertainment and correct me if i'm wrong but my understanding is the patio behind or the patio that's part of il pirata is not permitted for entertainment, is that correct? >> yeah, i think this is, i'd have to pull up the permit.

it was issued -- i would have to pull up the permit to see when it was issued but it was issued to police code having the ability to include it. >> maybe one those in the mid 8. >> if you all use your back patio for entertainment as well and amplified sound, you are going to want to actually make sure you come and talk to me about amending your existing place of entertainment permit to include that area as a part of your premises. >> absolutely. it's an extension of the experience. there's few venues and the whole neighborhood and the mission area that have an outdoor space so having someone looming over us is going to negatively impact the entire experience there. it's just such a very unique venue and to have something like that be jeopardized would be a

horrible thing and we just really want clarity and their construction practices and we would definitely like to set up a sound study maybe antonio can guide us in how we can accomplish that and just really make sure -- >> that's a requirement of the project sponsor, so you would not have to take that on. and that's something that antonio has made sure to communicate with the project sponsor on they've still got to do that. for all of those projects. >> i think my mother would like to talk. >> i'm sharon catechi, owner and

i believe is it lieutenant -- yes, i believe he permitted the patio. >> hello, yes. nice to hear your voice. >> yes, yes. >> that's great to hear the permit for alcohol. >> exactly. it would have been for the abc component. >> yes, yes. >> but that's really good to hear because that means you are likely eligible for an amendment which is good. so we should talk off line about that because at this point, the thesound study would include yor indoor space and the operating levels that you use for your sound system then. so that is worth checking out.

>> wove gone to the patios and you were saying the -- we haven't seen where they're having three decks, we did know where they're positioned in relation to us. we were promised a -- >> a mock up of these things. yeah. >> if you would like him to address that, he is still on the line. >> president bleiman: if you could. i want to get, i don't want to get kind of out of our purview here, right, i think what is important to me is to hear from the project sponsor, nick, i believe, have they conducted a sound study and he would be open to using a salter and i do want to make sure the two of you are

communicating specific low around the entertainment side of things. we do not speak to the necessarily to other issues and it gets a little, there's gray areas in there but there are other issues that other commissions take on like planning and others, right. we are specific low around the ability for you to conduct entertainment and we want to make sure that you can do that. so, first i guess nick, can you talk a bit about if they've requested items or can we get them what they need and a little bit about your interactions with them so far on responding to their requests? >> of course. we have sent numerous packages. i have talked to john and it's all dated in your packages and there's four or five e-mails with the dates. i'd like to be able to communicate better with john and

sharon and i know that we're talking about sound right now. so, wore going to do everything that we can. when we get through this, we're going to commission a sound study and that will trigger our next steps which will be to build some story polls and show them exactly where the different parts of the building are but we're getting no planning now but we certainly want to be a good neighbor and we want to communicate with john and sharon and i think we have been if you look at our information that you sent us and it gives you the front elevation and the back elevation and the there were fl. we will do everything we can to be a good neighbor and that's our full intention.

>> president bleiman: commissior the project sponsors or the neighbors? >> project sponsor, please. >> president bleiman: i'm sorry, i'm talking to the commissioners here. does anybody have any comments or questions? i'll give you a chance to speak in a moment as well. commissioners, do we have any other questions? >> and i'm sorry, i didn't quite get your name, it sounded like you had another comment from il pirata. >> yes, sharon. and we've been trying to get information since the first meeting in january with the architect to show the plans and at that meeting, he said there was no problem and that was in january of this year and it was

that where requesting and they said those were not the finished plans. we were also waiting for a couple other items. we did meet nicolas with both of our sons and during the demolition of the old building that was there. it was our damage to our fire escape and other things and he was going to come back and he wrote it up and he thought it had been taken care of and none of these thanks that were damaged have been taken care of. we have gotten off to a real rough start. >> and like the main goal here

is to just maintain the viability of a place of entertainment and it's going to be a huge challenge having three units right next to us with an inch and a half and all of you, you know, on the call here know the challenges that this will put in front of us and we're leaning on a lot of your knowledge and just you guys deal with this on a daily basis and just to get some guidance and support through this whole process would be great. a sound studio, antonio, obviously is going to guide us through that. yeah. any help would be a huge blessing. >> president bleiman: thank you. yeah, i think just for your peace of mind, there was the reason that we're here is this is because of a piece of legislation that was passed about six years ago, i believe,

i think it just popped up in my facebook yesterday because i helped pass it. that requires new developments to notify their tenants about existing places of entertainment and in those notifications, they come in the form of disclosures to the tenants and whether that is a rental tenant or a purchasing tenant, or a condo purchasing someone who owned the property, they basically have to sign -- they have to sign disclosers acknowledging there's a place of entertainment there and essentially, for lack of a better word, waving some of their ability to disturb the operations of that tenant, right. so the reason we come here is part of that legislation had them before come us, we heard

enough from the project responsr and the il pirata. i think we can discuss this now. and what recommendations we want to make to planning on behalf of this project. i might throw out a couple ideas before we discuss. one second, here.

we may want to have planning to take a closer lock at that and determine if that's enough room to stop sound from traveling through and it does sound -- also, everything should be on the table here and they have not had a sound study yet and generally, we are presented with sound studies from a sound engineer and that is not happened yet so we might consider inviting them back when there's a sound study so, just i want to throw out ideas here and just hear what you automatic think about this. >> it's hard to make a hard determination without more specifics from the sound study. i would move, would ask them to come back when that study has been completed.

>> president bleiman: any other thoughts on that? >> i concur. i feel the same way. i see al nodding too. >> we might run into an issue with that. yeah. just because, yeah. i think if you chose to do that, i'll just have to go back to planning and see if that's even an option at this point but they do need a recommendation at this time. decided a challenge. i'm not sure the history why a sound study wasn't conducted. because the venue couldn't accommodate it. tony do you have background with that? >> no, i believe they were holding off on the sound study just because of the venue nearest il pirata is not in

operation right now and so, with the current times, this, as well as other r.d.r. projects have to wait or that's general low what is going on and they have to wait until everything is back up and running because you can't really get the same results from at the did it before covid hit early in february 2020 so they were able to test the nearby p.o.e. and at this point, not sure we can wait that long. i might have to give the recommendations without it. >> nicolas checked the box the

sound study is not anticipated. we haven't done accurate studies did you don't want them to take a ready when there's no noise many of it's a complicated thing. and i think this may be a covid related, the measuring of the balancing between all of the sometimes non-essential items that can happen from some of those projects and the node to

get more housing and thing built in san francisco so we're just the entertainment commission here so we have purview on it. so i don't know. >> things have been done since this was demolished in march of 2018 way before the pandemic. >> i understand, if they hadn'tconducted the sound studyd the pandemic struck and it was impossible whether they could have or not before. so, can you give us guidance here. it sounds like a vote might ask if we might be able to come here and the results of a sound study