Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    March 19, 2015 3:30am-4:01am PDT

3:30 am
yeah. >> did you hear that? >> yeah. just a couple of words that i think would do it. >> lisa gibson. i would like to say that the intent here was that we had a first paragraph that was more again addressing partial preservation alternatives and we have in there language would apply generically to any impacted resource. so landscapes would be in that broader umbrella. it could be considered. the second paragraph is intended to address when it is the resource it's is a structure. and in the previous language, we i think were more specific to that that we clarified that in the structure, the second paragraph is intended to
3:31 am
apply. perhaps we can add that back in. >> perhaps i'm mentioned something is that never happens. >> there was a discussion about it. >> about all the landscape issues? >> yeah. >> okay. that's an example. >> and i recall certainly that we've evaluated the potential for cultural landscapes to exist and whether they are repaired for the marina project some time ago and there was not an impact and we can't facilitate an alternative to address that. if there were a significant impact to a cultural landscape we would address that impact. >> do we want to say something like "in many cases like retenant features facade retention because that's the question. facade retention
3:32 am
seems like a minimal amount of the structure. i don't know if that's getting too specific and maybe it is too specific. but minimal may seem like partial. >> i think that would be better to have implications. >> or no word at all. >> i think if we say historic features such as retention then it can apply to something that isn't specifically, i don't know. that seems like a way to do it. >> it can be a hitching post >> that makes sense. >> commissioners, tim frye, that would be for the first sentence so that second paragraph to rephrase it to say," in many cases retentions
3:33 am
of the historic features. >> any others? >> i move. >> then there is a motion to adopt this resolution as amended on that motion. commissioner hasz, yes, commissioner john's, yes, commissioner matsuda, yes, commissioner hyland, yes, commissioner wolfram. that passes 6-0. i have no other matters on your agenda. >> can i say one thing. i think
3:34 am
we might have made a mistake here. are you discussing the problem of that sentence on this? >> it feels like we are saying the same thing twice now. >> yes, tim frye department staff and the other thing we were discussing is because we introduced features then the rest of the paragraph is about facade retention. if the commission is open to it, i think we are capture the general intent of the discussion of the vote but we may need to massage a couple of the words here. >> we should then retract that vote and settle on the exact verbiage now and set a motion to continue working on the language. we should retract that item. >> can we open that item? >> we certainly can, chair. you will be reopening it, but through the chair
3:35 am
reopening item 7, if we could have' vote to retract that previous motion. >> motion to retract that motion. >> i second it. >> thank you, on the motion to retract the previous motion for item 7, commissioner hasz, yes, commissioner john's, yes, commissioners matsuda, ye, commissioner pearlman, yes, commissioner hyland, yes. that resolution is hereby retracted. >> so do we need to reopen public comment or can we go to a new motion? okay, can i have a new motion to how we want to approve this resolution. >> or direct to staff. >> mr. frye, we were conferring about some of the language. i think it would be helpful to back up a second and get a better understanding of what
3:36 am
the commission would like us to achieve. is it a matter of making it more general or -- our approach was the commission still had a desire to call out some aspect of the facade retention in the policy. so we shrunk it, added it to partial preservation and the first paragraph is meant to be very gentle -- general and the second paragraph to cases where facade maybe an option. the easiest to do is to replace the second paragraph. >> i was going to open up that conversation. do we want to eliminate that second paragraph or make sure the resolution has facade retention. >> that was the basis of our discussion and sort of started it. i think
3:37 am
it has to be wrapped in there. >> maybe we'll just leave it alone. >> i would make a recommendation to leave it alone. >> it's fine with me. >> does this mean we retract it. >> can we have a motion? >> i would like to make a motion to approve as it is presented to us. >> thank you. >> do i have a second? >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to adopt the resolution for the preservation alternatives policy. on that motion, commissioner hasz, commissioner john's, yes, commissioner pearlman, hyland, wolfram. yes. that passes 6-0. >> before we close the hearing i would like to thank commissioner hasz
3:38 am
for his great service as president. fantastic job. this hearing is adjourned. [ meeting is adjourned ] >> >> >> the annual celebration of hardly strictly bluegrass is always a hit now completing itself 12 year of music in the incredible golden gate park. >> this is just the best park to come to. it's safe. it's wonderful and such a fun time of the year. there is every kind of music you can imagine and
3:39 am
can wander around and go from one stage to another and just have fun. >> 81 bands and six stages and no admission. this is hardly strictly bluegrass. >> i love music and peace. >> i think it represents what is great about the bay area. >> everyone is here for the music and the experience. this is why i live here. >> the culture out here is amazing. it's san francisco. >> this is a legacy of the old warren hel ment and receive necessary funding for ten years after his death. >> there is a legacy that started and it's cool and he's done something wonderful for the city and we're all grateful. hopefully we will keep this thing going on for years and years to come.
3:40 am
good evening it's monday march 9, 2015, this is the san francisco rules committee item one is roll call and order schmitz commissioner white is accused a little bit arrest commissioner president adams commissioner dooley commissioner ortiz-cartagena commissioner l. riley and
3:41 am
commissioner tour-sarkissian arrest mr. president, we have quorum thank you well, welcome to tonight meeting so the first order of business on the agenda is general public comment this allows mustaches to comment generally on matters within the commissions purview and suggest new items are there any new items for consideration >> scott president of the small business commission california. >> hi scott. >> how you doing small business commission along with the federation of the and the handsomely has the ab 1280 what it does basically give a one-day tax holiday on small business right after thanksgiving
3:42 am
for your information the tax state tax is 7 and a half cents and san francisco is 8 so san francisco tax on another quarter percent what the hope is that if this passes the state that we can get local jurisdiction the legislation does not require a local jurisdiction to wave the tax that would be a problem if they didn't do it so the idea is to promote small business they're doing something similar in florida it is pending working its way through the system we think this is a good statement to assist small businesses we are aware we don't know what the cost is just yet we have down the road of the the department of finance with
3:43 am
workout the finance and get back to us. >> scott scott this is to propose it right to jaundice and yeah. yeah. >> so i'm saying the details are unnecessary in this quorum if the data is on the agenda we'll video a full presentation with the general public comment accommodations. >> commissioners for your point of information under item 5 though it's not part of the director's report i put it in there the details ab 1280 that scott had sent over. >> right decide to jaundice this in the future i don't have a problem. >> maybe that could be discussed. >> thank you, scott. >> okay the next order of business item 3 discussion and
3:44 am
possible recommendation to the board of supervisors on file number 441298 varies codes and noise for the residential used for the place of entertainment commission. >> so today, we have a presentation by connor johnson aid to supervisor london breed the legislative sponsor in your package we have one communication recommending support of the legislation and so that communication is in your binder about say o also a copy of the press release that was jointly sent out by supervisor breed and supervisor wiener >> that may have been us. >> supervisor breed. >> supervisor wiener is the co-sponsor good evening connor legislative aid to london breed as director states she's the author of the legislation thank you for the co-sponsor supervisor wiener as
3:45 am
well on think district 5 the independent music venue local operators there's a project next door the old raider shop building will obey turned into residential condos the venue concern it could pose trishgs for the new neighborhood for the light industrial use will complain and and potentially put the independent in a position to spend thousands of dollars this is thinking about the larger issue citywide which is as the city is pushing for more and more residential development often in nakdz with are not used for residential purposes those residents are running into conflicts that accident small
3:46 am
businesses like businesses of entertainment we want to accommodate those in the same neighborhoods and i think that is important if you look at the recent history of the pressures on the small businesses on night life venues we see in a few example club come back month the sound factory the bottom of the hill and other businesses the fact is we have a limited number of cultural venues and one pressure is the residential development so what can we do to protect those businesses that bring in $800 million of revenue every year we sat down with the entertainment commission and the police department and the planning department dbi as well as residential developers and the police and thought about how to improve the new residential development with the night life
3:47 am
venues and so illicit walk through go quickly what the legislation does that set out a process for new residential project that are going within 3 hundred foot within an existing night life venue so when this residential developer summits an application the entertainment commission receives a notice the venue receives notice the entertainment commission length angle hearing not whether or not to issue approval for the project or a building permit what we competently sell at it excelling the entertainment commission the opportunity to hold a hamburger to bring the developer and the venue in and the venue patrons to talk about if this goes through what are the issues that be flagged and
3:48 am
how can we that makes sure the venue is protected and the residents are happy they have the opportunity and in addition there's a provision if a venue is operating within the terms of the permits the city has set out not deemed a nuisance so in terms if the city has the terms we shouldn't come back in spit of the permit we're going to changer our hours or shut down we should live up to the terms lastly i think probably the motion impactful the legislation says in development near a venue and something is seeking to leased or purchase one of the residential units the seller or the lease our has to 0 disclose a venue nearby that's a simple here's a heads-up within 3 hundred feet may impact you on
3:49 am
friday and saturday night we see examples of people coming to visit comedies they spend the first fire hydrant and it's a different world and calling the police and conflicts between the venues so that's ultimately wasn't the legislation seeks to do prying to reproximity them getting the processes in place so the residents are happy and the venues can continue to serve the public so we're building the houses in so doing we have to protect the rebates they wanted to buildings here in the first place so lastly i want to thank the diverse coalition of supporters from the legislation and the california music's cultural protections that represents the pressure varies and customers it was all the
3:50 am
legislation was amazing comboertsdz by the advisory committee and supervisor wiener is a co-sponsor we've been grateful to work with the entertainment commission it is a staff and have their sport you're the first legislation and i hope this is a friendly audience we're going to try to protect the small businesses i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> sxhamd. >> i love this this is the left and this is long, long overdue and it reminds me of what happened at films in south of market you have all those new housing going up and especially in the south of market area if you look at the condos the special treatment district and clubs are still being shut down this is long overdue an awesome
3:51 am
piece of legislation it will help cafe north that brings a lot of for the purpose into the neighborhood an thursday and friday and saturday night they go to the other businesses around there this is very good i can't thank supervisor breed and supervisor wiener enough because this is something i impersonal feel is long offer dewey have my support. >> thank you commissioner dooley. >> yeah. i want to echo what he said which was this is a great piece of legislation it seems fair for both sides of the issue i really applaud you for coming up with such a full solution i like you guys (laughter). >> and i like the fact it your outreach to everybody was very good. >> commissioner l. riley. >> yes. i think it make sense
3:52 am
for the developer to work with the entertainment places before they built so that way they can do something about it instead of having the building built and later on having noise. >> commissioner ortiz-cartagena. >> i want to follow-up on the sentiments from the mission district. >> thank you for not ero seeing this and something is paying attention i like to be pro-active. >> i'm curious how will the disputes be monitored i premium there are standards of operation maximum and some noise standards; is that correct. >> sure a lot of those are existing procedures. >> no i think it is great i live in the dog patch and people
3:53 am
don't know what they're getting themselves into not standard residential area where this is something if you know about around the corner or down the street awesome thank you, very much do we have an action. >> oh. >> finally oh i'm preying you (laughter). >> commissioner tour-sarkissian. >> i congratulate you for the effort i have some technical questions that are quick legislation talks about the decimals that impact inside and outside can you explain what that is. >> sure so that's not our baby what happened then was there sort of a long story but those are establishment state building codes and we do you want those in the local code the state and
3:54 am
actually the federal and international level the stating state says its healthiest to live in an environment where the sound is not above 45 decimals so that's the goal of the entertainment commission not a goal we set some that was adopted into the legislation. >> 60 is it 60 decimals. >> talks about 3, 4, 5 and 60. >> i think you're seeing 60 in the sound map shows on and on an average above 60 the developers are required to do acoustic california analysis to get it down to 35 i know this it correct me if i am wrong. >> that's where the l d n exceeds 60 decimals that's where the analysis is showing that's the developer and not the
3:55 am
licensed folks. >> so it says if you're a developer seeking to build a project on van ness the sound will show van ness above 5060 decimals you'll have to do an analysis to show how to get it down to 45 within the residence this is not our baby but the same portion we've adapted. >> it puts the burden on the contractor. >> correct not on the venue correct so. >> on the developer not the venue. >> not on the venue yeah, this existing this is trying to make sure that the developer is looking at did place see. >> it is 60 they'll build such it will be below 45.
3:56 am
>> yeah. again, this was not a 12rur we built if up look at the places of entertainment in san francisco they're in the higher traffic busier easier they afternoon 60 decimals anyway. >> thank you. >> any other comments commissioners? >> so. >> thank you very much. >> public comment? >> good evening, commissioners i'm cammy in the entertainment commission i want to let you know your applauding supervisor breed and connor that is the first in the country this legislation nationwide people are feeling the pressure and you'll see things another areas i believe do you want this legislation i wanted to say that this legislation is so important so crucial for our live music to
3:57 am
peruser the resources in the city this is going to be a total collaborative effort with the developers some people were nervous but we'll be working with and not detailing development to protect the venues co-sponsor o connor mention feeling the pressures i want to mention the ballroom sunnydale getting tons of complaints because the builder built a substandard from the ballroom dancing music and the hemlock is facing poeshlg be issues and chapel all the venues need to be protected we're prevalent to supervisor breed effort. >> thank you for coming out. >> any other members of the public want to comment okay seeing none, public comment is closed.
3:58 am
>> do we have my further discussion or motion to support this. >> i want to place a motion to support this piece of legislation as it is. >> second. >> okay. >> all right. roll call. >> stamdz commissioner dooley commissioner dwight commissioner ortiz-cartagena commissioner tour-sarkissian commissioner l. riley and that motion passes 6, zero in favor to recommend are recommend to the board of supervisors to impact in piece of legislation. >> good job. >> thanks connor. >> okay. next item review the project for the recommendations to the mayor for outreach and economic salutation framework for infrastructure projects this is a discussion and possible
3:59 am
action. >> excuse me. commissioners, i need to just take the timer off. >> all right. so that's this wrong thing and i i'm to the public i didn't make copies so commissioners we've had discussion among the commission to request for the scheduling of departments to come before you so talk about the outreach which ultimately is an economic issue for when departments are doing infrastructure projects that is ultimately an economic issue for businesses and at the mayors kwaefrl meeting commissioner dwight and another commissioner in attendance a discussion of the
4:00 am
impact report and conducting it so the mayor there was a general discussion with the mayor the mayor does did agree that are a time you know and need for it and by wants direction when this is to be infected i think from what the discussion came from the small business be consultant to codify when the economic environmental impact report is done like the eirs not the same standard but to crate sub standards for which we as the city look at the economic analysis and economic reports and studies we've heard even in discussions here with the commission and the held the joint commission