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 given its a voice here. I support this legislation, as well. Next speaker, please. If there any more speakers, if you would line up behind this gentleman. This is a good proposal, and i agree with it. I wish you wouldve had it during the younger years when i was in fillmore. Each and every one of these people that came up here and explained why they want this, to have this type of protection, they are also crying out because it is their source of income in order to support themselves. This proposal, to displace them, is an example of gentrification. Gentrification is a word that is used to discriminate against people based on geographical locations. You are doing it to them, and even though their skin color is not black, it is the same type of treatment that black people had to suffer in the Western Addition of fillmore. For example, gentrification in washington is taking place, there is an attorney that has the same type of philosophy as me and suing washington, d. C. For the gentrification and displacement of tenants for hightech people that is displacing lower income bracket people. This is a derivative of this kind of demonstration that im putting before you. Cant get you on discrimination based on race, but you are violation their due process and equal protection under the law. It is not equal protection under a law by allowing a hightech company to come in come and stop negotiating the contract on continuing them to survive and support themselves by letting a hightech company like twitter come in and displace them. Youve got numerous Small Businesses that went out of business and have been displaced and boarded up. Then you turn around i want to find the owner of the Apartment Building complex because the tenant cannot afford to pay rent there. Youre doing the same thing all over again. So, this measure, that man is proposing needs to be in effect and should have been in effect when jennifer took place in the fillmore. Next speaker, please. Any other speakers after this speaker please line up. Good afternoon, thank you very much. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. Im speaking on behalf, i am nina miller on foztwo two attorney and i represent Todd Crittenden from whom youve heard earlier and his brother dave, i been a long longtime attorney. Im representing them and their brother scott who owns a building. We have heard a lot here today about the hardships of a Small Business. There are two people here who know that very well. Dave and todd have worked very, very hard since the 1960s to keep their Small Business alive in San Francisco. They are really looking to move that to the upper floor, that they lost during the downturn in the 1990s. Their hearts, i know, go out to everyone who is working to support a Small Business. I have submitted a letter on friday, i have never done this before. I want to make sure i get it correctly, i will submit another copy today outlining our concern and i will submit this to the clerk of the board when its available. The zoning control, one of our concerns is that the zoning control before you today we dont believe that this is properly drafted interim zoning control resolution or that the subject matter of this qualifies for the interim base. The impact on public health, safety, general welfare, i think its important to look at those in terms of the business that is trying to move in there is also the issue of the fact that they do have the recorded lease with micro biz to move into the upper floor, and this would presumably prevent that from happening. Thank you, counselor. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is jim vargas. I was born and raised in San Francisco. I think we definitely need to find a way to save mezzanine. Its been an incredible place for artists musicians, to continue to do their work. Losing mezzanine is going to mean a lot to the city. It is one of the only major independent venues of that size capacity. It also gives us an opportunity for a lot of the younger acts coming up to the city to perform there. To play with her their idols and get them on bigger bills. We need to save mezzanine for many different reasons, but to keep the spirit of San Francisco ally. Thank you very much. No other members of the public for this item. Let me close Public Comment to make a few comments before handing it over to supervisor 15 has sponsored this measure. I want to start with the fact that i introduced a similar piece of legislation, actually much more narrowly tailored as it related to the punchline which i believe is going to result in the outcome that it was intended to result in. This is a much broader Geographic Scope piece of legislation. While much of the testimony has been about one particular venue, this actually covers a wide swath of territory in district six, primarily district six, that is full of available, latenight institutions that are part of the fabric of the city, as many people have testified to. As to the contentions by the property owner, i am advised that this is entirely within the powers of the board of supervisors, somebody who authored a very similar piece of legislation to protect another entertainment venue. I intend to vote for it i want to thank supervisor haney for bringing it forward. Supervisor haney thank you terry peskin. I want to thank every who came out today, and spoke. I want to think, i shouldve said this earlier, folks from the entertainment commission, president of the entertainment commission, is here who has been, and has been working with all of us to try to make sure that the support and protect nightlife citywide. I want to thank everybody from mezzanine who came out today. I think what you spoke to demonstrated why it is so important that we do this. Why it is so important that we not only protect mezzanine itself, but venues like mezzanine. Who have been impacted by this legislation and have reached out and said how excited they are about this. We know that, if we do not do this, the forces that you spoke of will continue to displace venues and change San Francisco in ways that will be very hard to come back from. A venue like mezzanine is not easily replaced. I think we have seen a number of venues over the last few years that we have been unable to replace, they never can find a home in San Francisco. This is something that we take our responsibility to do, very seriously. This is within our powers to say it is because when the interest to have certain types of zoning uses, to have a higher level of specificity or discretion when certain types of things are happening. Particularly when we have seen an area in like soma where nightlife has been critical and essential and we see those venues disappearing. That is where we have to interview intervene for public interest. That is what were doing doing here. You have my commitment to do whatever i can to support and protect these venues, and also that we look for longerterm, more public solutions. It will be a temporary solution and we also need longterm solutions. I want to thank everyone that came out. I also want to recognize and think the cretin brothers and the representatives that are here, as well. I hope the conversations will continue. I hope you heard today why we are doing this, and why it is so critical that we protect these venues. With that, i hope we can put this forward, chair, with a positive recommendation to the board. Chair peskin i will take that as a motion Area Supervisor safai will not object. So we will send this to the board. He wanted to second but we do not second things on three committees, hence my words we will send this to the full board with recommendations. Without objection. Next item, please. Item number 5, 190458 ordinance amending the planning code and the administrative code to abolish the north of market Affordable Housing fund and have certain fees collected in conjunction with north of market Affordable Housing deposited in the citywide Affordable Housing fund; and making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101. 1, and findings of public convenience, necessity, and welfare under planning code, section 302. Good afternoon. Amy tam. Item number five is an ordinance to amend the planning at administrative codes to allow north of market Affordable Housing fee is to be deposited in the citywide Affordable Housing fund instead of the north market housing fund. We are requesting this change because we are currently depositing all impact fees into this fund, including other geographically restricted fees. You account for them separately . We will account for them separately. This is an accounting change that the comptroller recommended we change. We are expecting the fees to come. We would not be changing the use of the fees which would be for stabilizing and preserving Affordable Housing in the specialties district. You said everything this supervisor would like to hear. Anything you would like to add . Thank you. Good afternoon. I just also want to share that the Planning Commission heard this item on june 13, during the hearing the commission did recommend approval of the ordinance with a modification to index the fee to reflect todays economy. The proposed fee increase is to change the fee from 5 per square foot up to 25. 41 per square foot. I wanted to reiterate that this cleanup is to make the collection of the north market fees consistent with the collection of other Affordable Housing fees. Amy and i are available to answer any further questions. This concludes our presentation. Any Public Comment on this item . S. Okay. First of all, any transfer of any fees to the Mayors Office on housing, i object to. Her testimony verifies how she is only in support of high income bracket housing, okay. She refuses to include low income and very low income bracket people. The majority of the people. You have 8,011 Homeless People out in the street. Each and every time that you come up here, before the mic on the board coming you claim that it is 100 Affordable Housing. Each and every time, its time to put in an application, the lowest income requirement is higher than the income bracket hey you campaign and claim that you want to help. For example, this demonstration that i put before you and its right across the street from Saint Anthonys church. It says Affordable Housing, making it affordable for at least 39,000 per year. The ami scale here shows anybody that is making 39,000 a year, is 35 of the medium. That means everybodys income that is below that bracket, which is a group that is not only homeless, has disabilities in San Francisco, is 28,200 people that is in this income bracket that is not included in the socalled Affordable Housing opportunity. It is disgusting. Hundred nonprofit developer who is putting together 87 unit Apartment Building complex for a mere 64,000 54 million. 144 unit Apartment Building, look at me, please is 144 unit 456 million. Heres another threestory building that is cheaper than what newsom. Thank you, mr. Wright. Your time is up. You have made your point. Thank you, sir. Seeing no other members of the public on this item. If there is no objection we will send it to the full board with positive recommendation. Next item please. Item number 6, 190459 ordinance amending the planning code to allow operation of a Farmers Market on the department of Motor Vehicles field Office Parking lot at 1377 fell street by allowing an intermittent activity to be located on a lot with a public facility in specified residential zoning districts; affirming the appropriate findings. Mr. Asterisk are you here for this item . The floor is yours. Good afternoon, thank you chair travertine. The item before he was heard in front of the Planning Commission on june 20. During the hearing, they unanimously recommended approval of the ordinance exciting opportunity to enlarge the Farmers Market. There is also discussion acknowledging that there would be opportunity to allow the Farmers Market at the public facilities throughout the entire city. This concludes staff presentation on im available to answer questions. It is a simple and straightforward change. Any questions from Committee Members are Public Comment on this item . Public Comment is closed. We will send this item to the full board with positive recommendation. Next item, please. Item number 7, 190598 ordinance amending the public works code to modify the requirements for obtaining personal Wireless Service facility site permits; and affirming the appropriate findings. Good afternoon. My name is deborah im here on behalf of public works to give you a presentation related to personal wireless facilities. To expedite [inaudible] the purpose of the code amendments relates to current, state and federal laws to give them the rights to [inaudible] read foz permits much be issued and allow the city to establish objective Design Standards. The permitting process takes 90180 days and does not include objective design criteria. More specificity on the ruling is shown in this light, as you can see the order establishes a 60 day shot clock for existing facilities and a 60 day shot clock for facilities. The purpose of the amendment first and foremost are to comply with the fcc order. Over the last number of months the city departments including the department of technology, planning, public works have been meeting to develop effective and compliant approach to incorporate the fcc order into current processes. The proposed article 25 amendments includes amplification. Maintain master license agreements for carriers and communicate the process alike. This slide shows a sidebyside comparison of timeline. The current process takes 90180 days. The revised process will take 4560 days and reduces the process of referrals to other agencies. I will walk through in detail the current and proposed captured in our 25 amendments. This is the current wireless process. As i mentioned this process does take 90180 days. This slide is the proposed changes that will impact the process. Article 25 amendments to modify the existing permitting process only to include permit. They would similarly review authorizations for wireless abilities on the individual city poles. The permitting process would remain public works to ensure objective Design Standards and how standards are met. The amended process, the carriers would require clearance prior to their application before working with public works. Still refer the application for review. The amended process approved during the protest period. The appeal process would remain unchanged. It would ensure compliance with fcc order. This slide you can see the proposed process for puc. This process which was developed in coordination would comply with the new fcc order as well. [inaudible] a little bit of the objective design criteria. As i mentioned the proposed ordinance amendments are supported and are available for question. Thank you. Let me just say, for the record, that the industry owns the United States congress. Now that i have gotten that off of my chest. Are there any questions from Committee Members . I think you have done the best with what you have got. Thank you for your work, and thank you deputy City Attorney sanders for this and thank you for the briefing you gave me in my office area. I believe sanders had given you some proposed i was just going to speak to those right here. Clerical amendments on the following pages. Deputy City Attorney gartner they are on non substantial clerical amendments. He is nodding his head in the affirmative. We do not need to discuss section numbers 15, 22. I just did it. With that, are there members of the public who would like to testify on this item number 7 . That is mr. Wright. Unlike you, im not scared of going up against a multibilliondollar establishment. It was just a Radioactive Material that is being discharged by these towers that is built by schools. As a result, families, instructors, contract with the preschoolers located right by the tower, because of the radioactive generation that affects the kids, and no scientific studies being done. It is causing the schools to shut down. And thinking about shutting down. You have no test results to measure the amount of Radioactive Material that is coming from these towers. About you being affiliated with pg e, that is the worst he could do is be affiliated with them. The fires that they cause with several counties, caught on fire, about 1 Million Properties have been lost, and lives lost with defective equipment and it has just been determined that their equipment was notified, several years ago, that it was defective and it was just a matter of time bef