Given all the appeals over the years. Given that weve had a number of appeals and lawsuit, there are a lot of details that are confusing. We are talking about the mornings modernization of the Masonic Center. Can you tell the number of the proposed project . 135 patrons per show. 3300 from 3100. President david chiu thats my understanding. An increase about 4 percent of capacity for individuals. As i read your appeal letter, it didnt from my perspective didnt address the environmental analysis or the adequacy of that or as much as from 2013 was granted. I wanted to ask why didnt you bring a cu appeal if you spent a lot of time in your letter focused on that. We didnt file a conditional use appeal. The board is very stringent of getting the board before yourself. The reasons we did file a conditional use appeal. It was accepted by the clerk. The analysis of the signature did not meet the threshold required by the board of supervisors and the City Ordinance and we probably depending on h
Code. From an interpretation from the code that was issued several years ago. Special use districts are intended to modify the provisions of the under lining zoning to the extent and only as stated in the provision therefore the under lining zoning prevails. Earlier these same arguments were made in a superior court in the judicial challenge of the 2009 of determination. Once the court of appeal upheld the appeal, that matter was settled, the 2009 letter of determination was upheld in its entirety. On the environmental effects on the renovation project, this eir is comprehensive and thorough. Its 2 inches thick of single space text and covers every environmental issue imaginable in the neighborhood. One of the painstaking detail on traffic transit loading and pedestrian and bicyclist and noise and recreation and public resources, air quality, light and air. Appellants presented no evidence that the physical impacts were not adequately analyzed. The Planning Department to the board on j
Signature did not meet the threshold required by the board of supervisors and the City Ordinance and we probably depending on how things go today well see the ultimate outcome, but we did file the appeal. You did not have enough in the threshold. We did not. The appeals in the past were brought with 20 percent property signatures if thats correct. I think that is correct. I was not involved at the time. If you asked the question, i will give you an answer. The Settlement Agreement that some of the neighbors entered into has taken many of the opponents out. Now, what happened on the settlement it was Large Organizations that knob Hill Association. You will hear from barrett, shes the expert. Its been a very contention manner. There are people concerned about getting involved at this point. The fact that we dont have 20 percent is no indication that one is that the project has been properly analyzed. Of course that issue stands on its own, two, the nature of the contention of the neighbo
January 6th, january 3rd go into detail of the appellants arguments. The final eir is complete and objective. On behalf of live nation we request the board uphold and allow the renovations that are needed to modernize. Chiu president david chiu thank you, any questions to the project sponsor. Seeing none, lets hear from the members of the public that support the sponsor. Please lineup. Hello, David Elliot Louis representing myself as a resident aware of this project for some time. And someone who i think i can see from both sides. I urge you to reject the appeal and approve the project. I see this difference between age group, those who want quiet and those who want a nightlife and its also an issue of alcohol. I agree that can be a problem. I do believe that neighbors have a right to quieten enjoyment of their neighborhood but not at the expense of fun, not at the expense of decreasing nightlife. We can use a little more life in that neighborhood at night. The streets are really dead
Focused on that. We didnt file a conditional use appeal. The board is very stringent of getting the board before yourself. The reasons we did file a conditional use appeal. It was accepted by the clerk. The analysis of the signature did not meet the threshold required by the board of supervisors and the City Ordinance and we probably depending on how things go today well see the ultimate outcome, but we did file the appeal. You did not have enough in the threshold. We did not. The appeals in the past were brought with 20 percent property signatures if thats correct. I think that is correct. I was not involved at the time. If you asked the question, i will give you an answer. The Settlement Agreement that some of the neighbors entered into has taken many of the opponents out. Now, what happened on the settlement it was Large Organizations that knob Hill Association. You will hear from barrett, shes the expert. Its been a very contention manner. There are people concerned about getting i