tv Government Access Programming SFGTV July 18, 2019 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
and the greater community will benefit. >> thanks to sf environment san francisco has over one hundred drop off locations visit recycle damn and thanks for watching join us >> good afternoon and welcome to the land use and transportation committee of the san francisco board of supervisors for today monday july 15.
our clerk is ms. major. >> please make sure to silence all cell phones. to be included as part of a file should be submitted to the clerk. items after today will appear on july 23 agenda. >> all right. we please read the first item. . >> item number 8 ordinance amending the planning code to require building setbacks for buildings fronting on narrow streets, modify front yard requirements in residential districts, increase required rear yards in single-family zoning districts by five percent, amend the rear yard requirements for through lots and corner lots in certain districts to permit second buildings where specified conditions are met, and allow building height increases to existing stories in existing nonconforming buildings in order to accommodate residential uses; affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act; making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1; and adopting findings of public necessity, convenience, and general welfare
under planning code, section 302 >> thank you. we talked quite a bit about this last week. i brought in some amendments, and you brought in some amendments and they had to sit for a week. today i would ask you to pass this onto the full board to file a recommendation. >> thank you, supervisor. before we open it up to public comment based on feedback that i have gotten in intervening weeks , i would like to suggest some changes to section 172 that would exempt the residential special use district from that provision. i have those amendments in front of you on page 13, and page 16. i am also informed by deputy city attorney that we will have to make a corresponding page, corresponding change on page ten. with that we will open it up to
public comment. >> i think we have talked about this, -- thank you. >> while you are reviewing that let's open it up to public comment, item number one. >> good afternoon supervisors, i am with livable city. i am echoing supervisor mandleman's sentiment that you know there was a lot of great discussion last week and hopefully this can move forward, to the full board this week so it can be acted on before the recess. this has been a long time cooking. what this would do, the cottage portion of it would allow you to do something for housing that we can do for garages. if you look at the planning code. it will pitch -- allow you to put a garage in the rear setback which we should probably not allow anymore.
the idea was, if you can add storage for cars and a rear yard , is it impossible to add a unit that people can live in? with a yard in between the two buildings. that was the genesis of this conversation. we appreciate all of the attention that has been paid to it. we would like to suggest to amendments, they are hopefully non- substance. if you look at the planning code. everywhere that these alleyway height limits do apply in the limit. it is noted in the zoning tables for the district. if you look at the height and vault line, it says heights and vault controls this but it also says 260.whatever. we have been trying over the years to make the zoning control tables as complete as we can. a compendium of all of the provisions of the planning code.
we ask that you would add to tables 209.1 and 209.2 a note that says that these additional alleyway height controls apply in those zoning districts. @ if you can do it without re- referring. if it's going to delayed a week we can get it in if it's non- substantive, adding that note will make it clear to neighbors, make it clear to project sponsors that they need to look at these height controls in addition to the other height controls. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is karen curtis. last week when i was here i was here on behalf of the aia. this week we have not had a committee get together and talk about the amendments. i'm here is a personal sadness and with a few comments. one may be taken care of, i spoke to tom before the meeting, this is case 12 line 24 and 25. we want to make sure the height amendment can be used for any
use not just an adu. it is a pretty impractical spot to put in adu. and then the other is that i know the planning department has asked for the planning setback to be 10 feet, instead of the proposed 15. i would argue that that is more of an rdt issue. there may be cases where the 5-foot minimal is not acceptable. mandating the ten you are losing an extra 5 feet of space. at what that does from a building standpoint is when you have gone from 15 feet down to 10 feet, now you can add a bathroom in a powder room. when it goes from 15 feet to 5 feet you have room to add a kitchen and a bedroom. density is really the goal. maybe keep the 5 feet and rdt when the porches, setbacks and green space require more. those are my comments. thank you.
>> any other items of the public ever item number one. if not, we will close public comment. oh, go ahead, sir. if there any other speakers if you will line up to your right, my left. >> first and foremost i am a concerned san franciscan and also a local artist and technologist. with homelessness, poverty and plaguing our society. it is the mezzanine that gives people, of san francisco, salvation from their daily lives for many residents of the city. we must do our best to support the efforts, platforms of entertainment without a bit of an escape from the darkened streets, our people will flee for greener pastures. causing damage to our economy. i suggest we band together and support venues like mezzanine so the city can prosper and we can
all build a stronger community. thank you. >> thank you. seeing no other members of the public on this item. we will close public comment. there is one amendment on the floor, colleagues. as to page ten language you can work that out before it goes to the full board of supervisors. >> just to clarify that, page ten amendment is eliminating the reverence to section 207 corresponding to the amendment that peskin has proposed. >> we will take those amendments as to the three requests for amendments by members of the public -- i don't even know how we could grapple with the 209.1 notes, at this time. the city attorney is nodding his
head. i said to the project sponsor that if we were to delve into that and talk to the planning apartment as to whether or not it requires a referral and relook at that tape, we could continue the item with the sponsor. the sponsor would refer not to do that. is that correct? >> it that is correct. >> as to the other two suggestions. one of them i think was taking care of and the other one, i think there is not respectfully a desire to do what is due to the thrust of legislation is introduced. i don't think the committee is interested in taking that one. if there is no objection we will send the item, as amended to the full board with recommendation for hearing next week. madame clark, could you read the next item.
>> item number 2, 190248 ordinance amending the planning code to revise the nct-3 district controls to allow arts activities, philanthropic administrative services, and public facilities as a principal use on all stories, revise the upper market neighborhood commercial transit district controls to allow arts activities and institutional uses as a principal use on the first and second stories and as a conditional use on the third story and above and to allow general entertainment as a principal use on the first and second stories, modify the requirements for liquor stores and bars in the nct-3 and upper market street nct districts, add additional conditional use criteria for liquor stores and require liquor stores to comply with standard location and operating conditions, and add additional uses to the definition of open air sales; affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act; making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1; and adopting findings of public necessity, convenience, and general welfare under planning code, section 302. >> repent several forward last week. at least one of them we would bring back to you. what we are bringing back to you today that would not describe last week is non- subs. i will tell you where it is in case you want to look at it. the changes are page ten and 12 and are highlighted in the copy for the ordinance i just handed out. on page ten lines 14 and 19 were adding a note to the arts activities and institutional uses categories and on page 12 line six and seven we have the note which defines arts
activities in the upper market as active uses under section 145.4 planning code. i think with that, i would ask that you accept these amendments and forward this to the full board with positive recommendation. >> subject to public comment? are there any members here of the public for item number two? >> supervisors, i am executive director to support this moving forward today. with these amendments, the online version, we are glad you have fixed all of those with the amendments that you talked about that's exactly as was discussed here in committee. we strongly support this going forward. i live between the mission on the castro, there is a lot of small and local businesses that
are closing. we just heard about eureka lounge which was a great eating and drinking place in the castro, et cetera. it is a tough time for locally owned businesses in tran07. anything we can do to get rid of the red tape and trying to open a business, months if not a year of delay where you have to lease a space before you can even get permission to open these neighborhood serving locally owned businesses. of course as an executive director of a nonprofit our whole sector has been disappearing from the city. if we can open areas either on the ground, or @ spaces that don't currently have a residential use to nonprofit to arts uses. to these other endangered sectors of the san francisco economy that contribute so much. i think the upper market legislation is in good shape. i'm hoping it will be a model for reform and other zoning districts. thank you.
>> any other members of the public here from seeing none. public comment is closed. if there is no objection take the amendments described by his supervisor mandleman and send this item as amended to the full board with recommendation without objection. >> item number 3, 180939 ordinance amending the planning code and zoning map to create the oceanview large residence special use district to promote and enhance neighborhood character and affordability by requiring conditional use authorization for large residential developments in the district; affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act; making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1. >> to provide context for this item. i want to thank the department for spending and acceptable amount of time.
we provide for that. but we also want to encourage the development of more accessory dwelling units in those situations if you do go above that. some would argue that it would be an enforcement issue. we had a meeting prior to this, again, it was a 14 bedroom 12 bath. it was actually approved. now it has merged and evolved, and taken a different form. now it's turn into four separate residences and one single-family home. now they are talking about doing a childcare center which i am all for. the idea that once plans are approved and the neighbors have gone through a process there has to be a mechanism for there to be further conversation and oversight in those situations. we think even when it is an enforcement issue this will allow for the context and the planning department to look back on and say, in this particular special use districts, in this area of the omi, this is where
we need to start the conversation. we feel like this is a good balance area i want to thank aaron starr, along with other members of the planning department staff. we worked on other things before and also members of the community which spent a lot of time and patience giving their input on this. we feel like this is a fair balance. we also feel like it helps to inform the subsequent legislation that is coming forward. we think that this could help the floor to area ratio conversation is the right way to start. that is where we are. is there someone from the planning department that wanted to come up? if you want to speak on that i would appreciate it. and then we can open up for public comment. >> diego sanchez from the planning department. on june 13 the planning commission considered this
ordinance and a substitute of form. the commission is in complete support of the ordinance for several reasons including the following. basic as ud on land or dents regulations. while also incentivizing residential density through 80 use. it also establishes conditional use considerations that are quantifiable that require routine design review. in essence they are very easy to implement. that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to be here and answer any questions. >> supervisor safai brought up one issue about enforceability. how does one actually and force, not the fa are provisions -- >> that would be through the typical enforcement mechanism. somebody would say that the plans represented for business -- bedrooms and they believe there were six, we would send an enforcement planner out there to verify what is out of the site.
>> we have thought about that. we know that right now there is really no legislation, as i said. we hear from a neighbor back in 2015 all the way to 2017, it's a 13 bedroom, 11 bath home. there was really no reason to not try to hide that. what we would like to do, i mean, in a more perfect world and i think in a better way and our conversations we would rather that we broke up into two separate units. yes, if someone wanted to be creative they could put library, family room, so the bedrooms are harder to enforce, if people are not more open and brazen about it. the second piece of what we think is very enforceable is the bathroom threshold. it's harder to pretend you have a bathroom. >> while you're on the subject, relative to unit size equity. was there any conversation at
the planning commission. right now the current proposal is that the 80 has to be 33% of the primary unit and, i mean, i think this circumstance as the supervisor said, somewhat unique to district 11 because of the book ending by large educational institutions. i mean, ever trying to create a different housing, was there any discussion about raising that to a higher percentage? >> there was no discussion. were going to start out with 33% and see how that works. there is a fluid process, if things go up or down, i think we can come back here and do that. >> i guess another question as to the fa ours themselves, where there's a differentiation between the fa are for in h2 and in our h1, how did you come up with those numbers of .25% fa
are boost -- . >> the height -- the idea is in the rh2, if you're going to do a larger how she would have to do to units. it was more of a directional, not so much as sciences, .5 versus 7.5 or something to that effect. it's more directional. >> understood. all right, are there members of the public who would like to testify on this item number three? are there any other speakers after this individual? if you would line up behind him that would be great. >> your testimony again, you set up there and say it is not proper and safe to have several people living in one housing location that yet when it comes to affordable housing here and
all nationalities, particularly asian people who are explaining how adults are living in a one-room sro with a community bathroom and kitchen facilities. very little objections was taken place by this board and the overall administration. it's a conflict of demonstrations by your administration and it's a conflict of interest of managing the money. i want to further explain to you that redevelopment rule 410, i demonstrated were 15% of all all affordable housing that comes out of the mayor's office on housing it's supposed to be for very low and low income bracket people. you're not following your own rules and regulations. that is why you have this damn problem in the first place. for example at mission rock, 1500 units, if you follow redevelopment rules as part of your charter and business at menstruation law, 15% of 1500,
225 people who are economically disadvantaged would have housing opportunity. you failed to include them. you also have a building that is under construction. you make the requirement to be attentive to the building, where have to make at least $39,000 a year. that means that people who are in low income brackets that is not making that $39,000 a year, everybody's income that is below that range is not included in the housing opportunity. you claim to be equal opportunity housing organization. by the same response we have some conflict here with the ami. 2019 it says 39040%. on the other scale is says when you're making 10,000 -- >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> that is right, not rice.
>> good afternoon, stephen courier. twenty-six resident for amazon a district 11. he sent a little -- letter in support of this and i neglected to send one to you clerk, so if you want for your file. my story is a little different, because it is out of the special use district. i am fully in support of this ordinance. primarily because in our district we do have a lot of people who move in and remodel their houses. for instance next door to me last year, a house sold for $1.4 million and the day after it closed, memorial day, day after memorial day of 2018 the person who was taking care of my house when i was in paris e-mailed me and told me what was going on.
with the bathroom and kitchen permit he gutted the whole house after nine over the counter permits later he was fined $750,000. he reapplied for his building permit and in september of 2018, we sued them, he being represented by an attorney, i represented the neighbor, and we settled out of court. moving nine bedrooms to five bedrooms and six plus bathrooms down to four without paving over the front yard or the backyard, or the side yard and keeping the house in the shape that it is. we cannot have that in our district. it's not feasible, it is not safe. i agree with supervisor safai it doesn't make sense to have 14-16 people live it in the house. i fully support this. my next goal after this has passed the board of supervisors is to move it districtwide. if this is just a special use,
it doesn't value us, but if we can put it through -- >> thank you sir. next speaker, please. >> my name is mark romero, i'm a resident of the 400 block of ralston street. we have a home that the supervisor safai spoke about which was planned to replace bungalow. first it was going to cover the entire plot which planning to, but then it was a. after some negotiation in talking through planning and with the owner, they said they would scale it down and have included a two car garage, one kitchen. right now they just applied they have for kitchens in that unit. they have three living units and
one business unit in there. our block are rowhouses. if they have four bedrooms, that is a big house. most of them are two bedroom, one bath. a lot of them have apartments that nobody is complaining about that, as far as student and affordable housing. we have no enforcement. i am very confused at how planning could approve this and this was in 2015-2016 when they were asking residents to cut back on their water use and to okay on 11 bath home parking that wasn't an issue. now it is an issue. >> this is my opportunity to support this change in the ordinance. it is not going to help us with those kinds of problems but it is going to help our
neighborhood, and the quality of our life and also our property values and also still dealing with affordable housing for students. this is not about in law apartment set all. >> and the other members of the cup -- public for this comment? seeing him. we will close these comments. >> we just had a typo. i forgot where my notes were. it was part of the fa are ratios highlighted actually, hold on one second. if you could let me see your copy for a second. >> i have no highlight. tran28 is right here on page three, on line 18 it should say 1.5-1. that was it. wasn't highlighted in yellow but it was incorrectly listed. >> 1.15?
>> yes. >> we will take that -- >> that is the adu. >> understood. we will take that amendment without objection and we will send the item as amended to the full board with recommendation and we will see how the experiment of bringing ratios to residential development in san francisco works. this is a first. >> that is right. >> madame clerk and you read the next item. >> item number 4, 190689 resolution imposing an interim zoning control for an 18-month period requiring conditional use authorization for a change in use from nighttime entertainment to any other use allowed in the area south of market street bounded by the southwest side of 12th street to the southwest side of 5th street and the south side of market street to the south side of harrison street; affirming the planning
>> supervisor haney. >> this resolution is about protecting and supporting an industry that makes san francisco what it is. an industry that has such a special and essential place in our city's culture. it is what makes our city vibrant. it is known across the world for its art and culture. that is our nightlife industry. san francisco must be a place where we not only can live and work we can also play. we can also be ourselves and we can find others who want to build community with us. 80% of san francisco's nightlife economy is concentrated in the northeastern corner of the city and the south of market the area that will be impacted by this resolution is especially important. some of our city's most unique, popular, innovative and historic nightlife venues are in south
market. venues ranging from a dna lounge, the eagle to the stud. mezzanine and monarch have shaped san francisco's culture for decades. in many ways, it seems to have been made for nightlife. easy access to public transportation, freeway, as an industrial area with larger parcels and business making it -- western selma and particular. have also played an incredible important role for the lgbt community. unfortunately, soma is now grounded zero two losing important community spaces to development. commercial rents keep going up and buildings are sold, and converted from bars and clubs, cultural centers, mom-and-pop shops, community spaces often and office space. one of the most recent examples
of a venue that is in danger of being displaced is mezzanine, place that has had an incredibly important role as medium-sized independent locally owned music venue in the heart of soma. it is vital we protect these nightlife venues and corridors. they also play a significant role in our local economy. entertainment venues provide an important job opportunities for a diverse array of workers. not only do bars and clubs impact the people who own them, they also employee bartenders, promoters, entertainers, and many others. according to a report done by the city controller there were approximately 3500 nightlife establishments providing 60,000 jobs in bringing in @ over $6 billion in revenue to our city. it hasn't become obvious yet.
we need our nightlife venues. our cultural identity and a significant portion of our city's economy depends on it. this resolution provides for a simple but important protection for nightlife venues in soma. these controls will require anyone who wants to change a nightclub or bar, into other uses, to apply for a conditional use authorization. it will require us to look at each situation falls on a case by case basis. he will be able to weigh the impact on the public interest in safety and examine the effects of employment on the area especially the job impact. these interim zoning controls will last for up to 18 months and will allow us the time to look at any proposed displacement of the nightlife establishment. on a case-by-case basis with the attention and consideration it deserves. it will also give us time to come up with a plan for more targeted and effective policies to protect nightlife more
permanently in soma and beyond. i urge my colleagues on this committee to consider this interim control and move it forward to the board with a positive recommendation. >> thank you. why don't we open this up to public comment. if you would like to come forward and testify on this issue. the floor is yours. >> good afternoon honorable supervisors. i have a handout to share with the supervisors if i could. >> my name is todd, i'm actually one of the owners of a security company. i'm also one of the brothers that owns a building at 444 jesse street. i want to tell you about our company. we started it in 1965. we were at 590 howards rate. in 1978 my parents purchased the building at 444 jesse street. we have been there ever since.
we ran our business on the first floor for 20 years, with rubber stamp die company and graphics in the basement of the building. in 1990, our security business went away, and the technology replaced it. we almost wound up bankrupt. 1990-1995, our father worked for free in hopes that his sons and our employees could have enough money to provide for their families. my father in 1995 had double pneumonia and had to retire. dave and i took over the business. he was the cfo and i was ceo. we have been in the basement for many years. in 1999 our father signed a five-year lease to a person who also who is a tenant who has a subtenant was a.com company
called the -- gratitudes.com. for-5 years later became the mezzanine. they honored a 20 year lease, and it expires in october. our hopes in october is to expand our business up to the first floor. right now we have 25 employees, we have some employees that commute four hours a day from oakley, to livermore -- to san jose. >> thank you, sir. we have your written testimony. unfortunately i have to give all of the speakers the same amount of time. that is the law. i apologize. i will finish reading your statement. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is clarity. i own two pieces of commercial property in new york city, i own residential property in miami, and i am close to the mezzanine family. i am frankly and i'm sympathetic
person and a @ in commercial real estate you follow one rule. you want to keep a tenant in your building. the way to do that is to make sure that your giving the city and which are building resides at what it needs now and what it needs in five years. if your current tenant meets the description you let them come to the negotiating table to negotiate an expansion. whoever is advising the current landlords of mezzanine that's reconstructing a building and turning it into office spaces is going to give you maximum rent into infinity either doesn't care if your building is empty in five years or has no idea what they're doing. the last thing so many san francisco needs, ending urban place needs his office spaces. if you can rent to an office space for five years good luck, in five years you have an empty
building and it will be the death of your investment and the death of the city. i would encourage landlords in soma and the landlords of mezzanine to think about your investment long-term. you want to keep mezzanine there , should they pay my rent? of course. should they be allowed to negotiate? absolutely. and what you want to do is to capitalize your building and have an empty big space sitting there five years. be smart, do the right thing, think about your money. >> next speaker, please. >> have been trying to tell you that all along. >> i am a housing case manager. [inaudible] our roots are in the soma.
i started my work with bishop, i'm also a bartender and have been employed at several venues throughout the city during my ten years. one of the places i worked at was empire room which is located at golden gate avenue. the reason empire closed is because the building owners decided that they would have a nightclub there, or that they would rather have condom -- condominiums there instead of nightclubs. i know it is in the giant like twitter who swallowed mezzanine hall. has a place of employment for its staff. it is experiencing, it is not happening. mezzanine's impending closure is happening amidst wealth and prosperity for the few at the expense of an enjoyable quality of life for the rest of us. san francisco nightlife is dying due to the same forces jacking up rent prices on our neighbors,
nonprofits and ourselves. the perceived demand spurred by the influx of tech wealth and the interest to come along with it. [inaudible] i can't count how many bars and nightclubs i frequented throughout my adulthood that have shut due to circumstances similar to empires. with a disposable income that it can't afford $20 put -- plus to -- tip for craft cocktails. [inaudible] it is increasingly difficult to survive -- >> thank you. i have to give everybody the same amount of time.
>> hello. i am the president of the san francisco education commission. i stand before you as a civilian a bar owner, an organizer around nightlife. our most cherished nightlife institutions in our cultural institutions are facing credible pressures right now. challenges they've never faced before. displacement specifically where spaces are sold off to the highest bidder, spoiler alert it is often tech office space. it's rampant and a serious problem for us. focus on in soma is debatably the most important area in san francisco for some of our most cherished nightlife and institutions. one thing if businesses can up and move like mezzanine. due to some pretty strict zoning laws around entertainment and also the unattainable costs related to moving the space,
simply cannot in most cases. nightlife is too important in an economic cultural driver for us to sit back and watch as our institutions are sold off to the highest bidder. i implore you to support today so we can do a better job of researching what can be done. i would just ask the landlord again to negotiate in good faith, and take advice from the people who are encouraging compromise. thank you very much. >> i'm chris sanders, i am the marketing director for mezzanine of today. i want to talk about my other role which is running a record label out of san francisco. many of our artists and event organizers that we work with work in the smaller venues in this proposed zoning area. many of them are from marginalized communities.
they build communities of fans and patrons and friends and eventually those communities turn into big events that do end up happening at mezzanine. these are really important spaces where people explore their creativity and calm rotary it without spaces like this, the city loses its character. many people are going to come up here and talk about what it would mean to lose mezzanine. it's not just about our venue. it's about all of these spaces and all of the issues that they are facing. in is city where our city hall shares civic center with bill graham civic auditorium that is named after a pioneer of music event culture, in a lot of ways. i feel like we need protections for spaces that support and foster this kind of creativity, and community.
that is all i have to say. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> i have been working for 13 years, i just want to echo the sentiments of support for supervisor haney's legislation to protect a vital resource that makes san francisco so great, as chris was saying as well, these spaces are so much more then just bars or places to party. it is places people come together from all different backgrounds and different walks of life to find people to feel safe to express their art and build their careers. we have seen so much of our creative move away from the city, it is because they are being priced out it's because of losing these spaces to perform their art.
i think it is so important to preserve these spaces that's it. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is rob casanova, i am the manager of mezzanine but i also run an art collective in the tenderloin it's about a year old. i stand before you as a citizen that moved to san francisco about 11 years ago. i was born in the bay area. i would always escape to san francisco because through and through i am an artist and san francisco always have that. i remember walking through the streets and seeing how beautiful it is. you could feel it. you could feel the energy. right now, it is no secret what is happening. i could echo it again. mezzanine, and dna lounge, all of these venues help out artists
specifically. not only just use it come on talking about, artists, painters i am pretty stubborn and i plan on staying and being a san francisco artist. these small independent venues host art shows that let people know that the art and san francisco is actually still alive. @ artists are getting pushed out to san francisco. they're going to oakland, getting pushed out of oakland. pardon my french but i call bull ship. we are still here, we just need to make sure that there are places like mezzanine, all of these places that help us out, they are there so we can grow and thrive. that's it. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is aaron met her, i am
the tell a buyer for mezzanine come as so basically i negotiate and fine artist to come into the venue and perform where it's music, art, or any of the types of events that mezzanine host. i want to put a personal spin. i think everyone here has covered how we all feel about the city and spaces being lost to corporate entities. i moved here from southern california eight years ago to find my voice, because i've always known that san francisco is beautiful and vibrant city, deeply involved in the arts. i knew it would probably be a place where i would fit in and find myself. i definitely did. not only did that happen, but i found a family. this is is emotional for me
because i don't want to lose this family that i have. i have an amazing young assistant who is vibrant, lovely , and she reminds me of me in my early 20s had i have an amazing boss who challenges me, inspires me, and honestly sometimes scares the shit mac out of me, but i love her. the fact that i get to work with such amazing women in foztwo two industry that is dominated by men is also such a pleasure. i'm just hoping that, you know, we can all come to some sort of agreement to keep mezzanine, keep those families alive. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> mr. chair, supervisors. i would like to discuss for a
moment, if i could, urban ecology. when i was much younger in 1960s and 1970s, i was quite amazed when local real estate developers decided it would be a good idea to fill in the lagoon and develop seaside houses. fortunately, a number of enlightened minds fought this another disastrous proposals and it was saved. we recognize today, of course, that folly would produce on the consequential destruction of wetlands and house life. let's flash forward 50 years, we face similar issues, but this time it is with the urban ecology. historically, san francisco has been the nesting ground for music and poetry, artists and writers. artistic art lands are now in danger. a tsunami wave of cash has swept over this town, mostly tech cash.
we face major urban ethological changes now. a vibrant movie scene requires infrastructure, music education, music rehearsal space, small and medium-sized music spaces such as mezzanine. just as egress and could not compete with real estate development half-century go. smaller music venues and the rehearsal cannot compete in this tech office space environment. it cannot survive without your legislation, legislative intervention. inc. you for your support. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> thank you chair, supervisor haney for proposing this legislation. my name is deborah jackson and i'm the owner of mezzanine. i'm emotional right now hearing from aaron and his staff.
mezzanine is my baby. it has been a staple, in san francisco, music, culture and nightlife industry for 16 years. i came on board a little bit later. i have been there for about 12 years. i started as a general manager and four years ago the owner transferred ownership to me to make me the first female, independently owned, music venue of 1,000 capacity size. i am extremely proud of that. as aaron mentioned, we are a family. i have about 40 members of my staff, that does not include security, the artists that play there, the promoters that do their events there. there are many people being affected by losing, not just mezzanine but three of of the
venues we have already lost and could potentially continue to lose. mezzanine has already supported local artist. when we have lady gaga, or floor to the machine come by, and play our clubs, we always make sure that local djs and bands have the opportunity to open for those artists and have the ability to play somewhere and get the recognition, and get the word out. this is bigger than mezzanine. as i said it hurts the musicians, the promoters, it hurts san francisco's rich history of providing spaces for people to come together and find new experiences. if we do not want the city -- >> thank you.
>> thank you for the opportunity to speak i'm a private citizen. one of the reasons i moved to the city seven years ago, one of the reasons my wife and i thought it was a good idea to come here was to come up with diversity entertainment, nightlife, and san francisco. it has remained a draw but it seems to be on the decline. the draw to not only staying at work here disappears, but the draw for people to visit the city disappears. more and more people are working from telecommuting, changing these venues i would encourage the legislators to pass this legislation. thank you. >> i want to add a bit of an outlier perspective to this as an artist on a technologist. i came here to make an impact in
the tech industry. i find myself sped up by this kind of machine. i find myself adrift in our city and the thing that was my salvation was the arts and entertainment here. it was venues like the mezzanine, the wonderful staff that allowed and gave me opportunities in the city again. i can guarantee you speaking from both sides of the perspective, of both art and tech that all of us will leave if venues like mezzanine are not allowed to provide entertainment and to our city. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> i am michael lee. i moved here about 15 years ago because of the nightlife industry. i walk around downtown on saturday sometimes and it's pretty much dead. i would like to keep this
legislation in place to keep people in downtown throughout the night time. think you. >> thank you. >> thank you so much supervisor haney for this legislation. i moved here 13 years ago not necessarily chasing a career, just chasing the idea that was san francisco, excuse me, very emotional right now. six months after that i got a job at mezzanine. i was able to support myself proudly and to have a lot of fun. most importantly i was exposed to that idea that i have fallen in love with in san francisco. the people, the music, the arts, the community. the trend that is going now, the spirit of the city is truly passing. if mezzanine closes, most likely i will move which is just something that is personal,
because i feel that san francisco is going the route of any city usa. it's not special anymore. it doesn't have heart anymore. i feel with legislation, you're actually saving the spirit of the city. i support it with the bottom of my heart. i support all of the venues, the artist, the promoters who have found their path and are doing amazing things for this community i continue to do so. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> hi there. i am sarah west i'm a talent buyer at mezzanine. nightlife is a valuable part of the nightlife in san francisco. it is the main thing that keeps 20 and 30 somethings here in the city. if we push out this age group and take away establishments they are forced to go elsewhere for entertainment and we lose to those surrounding cities. we should all be working to keep
these establishments of culture open in san francisco. it boosts our economy and the overall livelihood of the city. mezzanine has single-handedly built my career from the ground up. to see a place like that that has helped so many people over the years close, just because of an ending lease agreement and refusal to negotiate another one it is a heartbreaking reality. let's save mezzanine. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> josh armstrong, fifth generation san franciscan. i've been here for many years, my dad telling me about the family dog, and other institutions from the past that have come and gone. more and more corporate promoters are coming into the area and pretty much taking over a lot of the rights for the independent venues that are no longer becoming independent. all of the names on this list
are part of the independent venues. they employ independent artists and employers are also locals. i just want you to support those venues and uphold this legislation. thank you. >> my name is jenna prensky, san francisco resident. i have recently become close with a mezzanine family, and have spent a lot of time there over the past couple of years. i just want to speak for the exemplary nature as mezzanine as a venue. there is a lot of music venues out there that are not necessarily the safest places where people. mezzanine continues to be a safe and secure place for women to take part in local music and things like that. it is ran by an incredible team of women. i want to make sure that is