Entertainment panel approves Palm House permit over neighbor objections on noise and open windows

The San Francisco Entertainment Commission on March 19 approved an LLP permit for Palm House, a restaurant-bar on Union Street, despite multiple neighborhood objections about noise and repeatedly open rear windows.

Staff described the application as seeking indoor entertainment until 11 p.m., outdoor amplified sound 10 a.m.–10 p.m., and a cap of 10 entertainment events per calendar year, each no longer than four hours. Owner Jeff Davis told the commission the venue has struggled financially — sales are “about 50% down” since 2022 — and said the permit is critical to the business’s viability. Davis described measures he says the business will use to limit noise, including a tested house sound level, manager oversight and a plan to remove crank handles so back-room windows will be closed by 10 p.m.

Neighbors countered that Palm House’s physical layout makes compliance unreliable. Attorney Andrew Grindstaff, representing residents at 3033 Buchanan Street, said his clients had submitted multiple letters and reported at least four post‑hearing incidents in which staff failed to secure windows during events. “Palm House’s current physical configuration and systems do not allow for windows to remain closed during live entertainment,” Grindstaff said, and asked that, at minimum, indoor entertainment be limited to 10 p.m. if the commission approves a permit.

Patrons and other neighborhood supporters also spoke. David Landis, a food reviewer who said he has patronized Palm House since its inception, told the commission the owners “care about their neighbors” and urged approval. Several other callers gave firsthand accounts on both sides; one neighbor played a short video and photos showing windows open during events.

Commissioners debated mitigation options — including strongly recommending sound curtains and portable cooling units — and emphasized enforcement tools the commission can use if the permit holder fails to comply. After discussion a commissioner moved to approve the permit with staff recommendations; the motion was seconded and carried by roll call. The chair announced the permit had been granted and reminded the owner to follow up with staff on next steps and on the mitigation suggestions the commission discussed.

The commission’s approval does not eliminate enforcement: staff signaled they will continue inspections and that fines and administrative suspension remain possible for repeated violations.

The permit was approved after full public comment; the commission recorded aye votes from the chair and each seated commissioner present.