the appeal was rejected by project sponsor and on may 4th, 2009, a c.u. was filed to legalize the outdoor activity area. the appeal process continue forward, and during the process, the department considered arguments put forward by the appellant and concluded a c.u. could be sought by the project sponsor. in 2009, the board of appeals heard the case and the matter was continue to call the chair to allow the property owner to seek conditional use authorization to legalize the outdoor activity area on the roof. this is a matter before you today. the project sponsor will reduce the area of the roof deck as used as an accessory to the restaurant to approximately 2477 square feet. food will be prepared predominately in the main kitchen and we he did in the outdoor area. beverages will be provided to a service bar available only to employees. there'll be no entertainment other than background music that will not exceed noise limits. the proposed hours operations are monday through thursday, 3:00 until o'clock p.m.. saturday from 11:00 a.m. until 1:30 p.m.. all

braunstein's c.u. was nearly revoked. i didn't want to be at any of the other meetings we had over the last two years trying to get resolution on this noise issue. but this has been a litany of broken promises and lies from the very beginning. greg came to our organization. he had the existing bar on the site. there had been a lot of noise problems there. and one of the reasons that we supported his plans to basically completely reconstruct the building is that he promised that the noise issues would be addressed and we wouldn't have them to worry about anymore. that didn't happen. and even very specific things that he agreed to. the building has sort of an air lock door system where there are two doors, and you have to go through one door and then another door to get in. the conditions of use specified that the outer tour always be kept shut. he said the east most outer door would only be for an emergency exit. for most of the last couple of years, up until the he began complying, that upper door was open nearly every ni

people who supported him in his business into adversaries and he has ignored the conditions of his c.u., which allows him to be in business. and worse yet, he has ignored the needs of his community that he finds himself doing business in. and for us to grant jurisdiction in order to consider lowering the penalties i think would be much more than unreasonable. i do not intend to support granting jurisdiction. >> the issue here is whether there were circumstances or due process issues related to the case whereby jurisdiction may be an appropriate way to deal with it. it's not dealing with the actual case itself, either the fine or the conditions at this point that are apparently not being met. on the one hand the presentation on the reasons for jurisdiction were very minimal and they were not extensive enough to be granted. the question is whether or not we can, through the office of this board, sometimes assist in crafting a solution. perhaps that's the optimist in me. whether that is an appropriate reason for granting jurisdiction or not is to be determined. i'm not sure yet where i'm

hopefully the international i still consideration will soon find a permanent place on its counter for the c.u. events and more countries will join but for now say be a is gearing up to host the next junior ice hockey club world cup ramon calls for an artsy homes. and then not that said oh it's cool for the moment smaller.

. >> stone: most popular guys at c.u. >> kroft: do you remember what the attraction was?ember our senses of humor were just so similar that we would just really crack each other up, and it got to the... it got really annoying for everyone else in film school. >> stone: "watch out for that bear trap." "what?" >> kroft: at ages 19 and 20, they raised $100,000 to make a movie about colorado prospector named alfred packer, who was forced to dine on his colleagues while snowbound in the mountains. "cannibal: the musical" was rejected by the sundance film festival, but parker and stone went anyway and held guerilla screenings in a hotel conference room. did the film get released? >> stone: uh-huh. sort of. >> parker: basically, on video. >> stone: yeah, i guess that's... i guess that's what you could call it, a "release." >> kroft: i can, like, buy it on amazon.com? >> stone: yeah. i bet you can. >> parker: you might not want to pay more than a dollar for it, but... >> stone: you may not like the price. ( laughter ) >> kroft: they moved to hollywood and spent three whole years