unit council area and estimated sales prices and we went ahead and ran the numbers on the hypothetical c.f.d. for each of those projects to understand what if a developer was to enroll and what it would like like and the numbers assuming an average unit size of 1,000 square feet which is roughly in the ballpark for most of the project and sales prices between $850 to $700 a square foot which is, frankly, where a lot of these bojts are to be feasible. it doesn't mean they'll feasible yet, but what we see the an effective rate and the effective property tax rate is 1.14. 1.18 to on the high end 1.39%

and this is an annual assessment per unit and on the low end to the very high end of $200 and that is one rincon tower and that is the outlay because it has a particularly large infrastructure burden. none of the other nine, by the way, even come close. and i'm happy if the commissioners would like to distribute a copy of the spread sheet with all the anymonumbers. and theed are 10 projects that could theoretically get use of this program. and it is about $200,000 to join one of the districts and usually it is a larger project.

>> i would like to see mr. cohen's concern regard iing mart octavia is added to this list. it is in there now? okay. and the other thing that's a question and i'm not sure i am understand is what is the analysis? as abag indeed abag is a regional planning agency with, quite frankly, limited powers and they have a healthy public finance unit and the authorization from the state to create assessment districts and

so we're using them and they are competent and have done in many jurisdictions and, if you will, they are the experts on c.f.d.'s in the bay area. >> what is in it for them? >> i think they cover the administrative costs and get a certain percentage of every one of the transactions and they are not a profit making entity and covering the administrative co-s. and in mainry suburban jurisdictions and also the mid plaza c.f.d. was an abag and administered district and a c.f.d. on 690 market street it was abag created and managed.

perhaps, i don't know, maybe the city attorney can clarify that mission bay might have been administered by abag, although i'm not sure. and so there are a couple of examples in the nine counties part of abag. >> and a financial role and like the umbrella organization but no other organizations and looking for increased entities and pushing us hard to assume the responsibilities of what we are already doing and i want to know there are no other incorrect strings attached. >> definitively no, although they would say that the role is helping this advance that. >> another question is who

funding this proposal? can you shed light obthat on that? >> they have the prequalified pool of real estate economic consultants that went through an extensive r.f.p. process and the planning department and others participated in and our intention is to select a consultant from that preapproved list to avoid lengthy delays. and the consultant will be reporting to the city and engaged and expenses will be reimbursed by the project sponsor just like a ceqa arrangement. commissioner moore: thank you. vice president olague:

commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: just a quick yes. was i correct in saying as we're projecting it would be available down the road to all the different areas of the city? we're starting out with rincon hill on one instance and the i.f.d. on the other -- >> i.f.d. and we have to come up with a policy that says we will have a neutral policy and if you have an area that has an up plan or increases development potential and fit the policy requirements and i.f.d. could be available for your neighborhood. commissioner antonini: that is what i was saying earlier that you are going to self-select and work where the zoning alouse it to happen.

>> if a neighborhood meets the policy requirements, thektd apply and -- they could apply and seek to form an i.f.d. vice president olague: commissioner moore? commissioner moore: in your short write-up in the commission calendar for today, you are saying that the committee would supervise the consultants and that the consultants would not develop policy. they should basically give tools to develop policy but not be in the business of policy development. is that just written in gist or what is applied here? >> certainly not written in jest and might not have been written well. the city makes the policy and

the consultant will help us project that and once we have the information we can make intelligent policies and the consultant doesn't decide policy and the planning commission will make that decision. >> and for anybody who supports this that is particularly spelled out. and the draft policies. and find a serious conflict and nothing that i could afford. >> if staff can note that and i don't think there's any >> and it was in there.

>> commissioner antonini? >> and you are now on and we're going to come back in literally 5 minutes and hear three items. and the ordinance on there and nine, 10, 11. and then we'll be taking a longer break. we'll take a

>> we will proceed to item nine and case 2010.0355 tz. >> good afternoon, commissioners. sarah sullivan from the planning department. the item before you this afternoon is an ordinance introduced by supervisor dufty on 800 market street as the lgbt community center. it will create a special use district and remap the special use district for that to be reflected on the special map. on the top floor of the building currently in zoning controls and do not permit many uses up there and essentially this will allow a full service restaurant, bar, and other entertainment uses and as long as it doesn't -- as long as it's not over 7,000 square foot, and outdoor activity will

be permitted on the top floor and there are several operational restrictions on this. and the hours of operation and some noise control restriction as well. and essentially that's what it's allowing to happen with the building. the range will be for community to serve the lgbt to go to the historic preservation commission yesterday because it is individual landmark 233. and they unanimously recommended approval of the request. one last thing, i do want to note that the department is in support of this. we are recommending one slight modification. it is a technical issue and it is cross revensed. and supervisor dufty's office is

here and i am available for questions. >> commissioners, very good to see you. and i will speak very briefly and we will answer any technical questions and from our office, i apologize for supervisor dufty's absence. was here but is currently chairing a committee down stairs so i am here in his office. this is a small piece and a modest proposal we believe to help the center have some financial flexibility, one of many pieces we have participated in earlier this year. we provided essentially a loan to the center that allows them to save money on their interest

payments over the period of the next five years. in addition we have helped the center with their economic programs whether it be the transgender economic power initiative, providing job services or the economic development program with the center. and so we think this is a modest proposal and one that is exciting not only for the center but really the neighborhood and will allow the building to be used by many people who are coming to not only to eat there and current uses and a number of people that are currently using it. we're certainly excite about this proposal and would love to have the commission's report. i'll have rebecca r orbing lshg rollfs come up now. >> thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. essentially we're asking for the ability to bring in commercial tenants on the third and fourth floor of the building. the reason that we are looking at this is the center has

historical challenge. we're 8 years old and a relatively new organization that opened in 2002 and we have had many successes and developed great programs and services and done value to the community and welcome 9,000 visitors every month. we have about 3,000 events ef year and we include economic development and community support and support for children, youth, and families. one of the challenges is the building it operates at a significant loss due to the building design and relatively low buildings and the building is relatively expensive to map tan and we carry the mortgage from capital debt from the construction period. and the building runs at an $83,000 a year operational loss. when we add in the debt service, that goes to $236,000 a year loss on the building it. and we're looking at

self-efforts to increase the financial stability of the center. and one of those is a way to maximize revenues and to better utilize the space and one of the significant issues is to bring in long-term tenants. and to allow us to move other activities there and to maintain the current level of activity and surfaces and benefit to the community and increasing the revenue by about $100,000 a year the first year of the lease to $160,000 by year four and five. and this gives it significant financial benefit to move towards the building being more self-sufficient and importantly moves us away from there and will cooperate to be constrained for obviously the near future.

we think this is a smart solution that utilizes the resource that we have and that maintains the benefits of the community while allowing us to accrue a much stronger fingerprintsial ability. there are opportunities to tie a restaurant or commercial use of the building into the center's functions and that bripgs more folks into the building and creates more familiarity with the programs and services and we would also be looking for ways to tie a job training program and other services that might have a programmatic connection to the center so make sure whatever commercial venture is brought in that there is a strong benefit to the community as well as increasing our long-term stability. i would be happy to answer any questions that you have. we also have a number of folks who are here to represent the scepter. i wonder if you will be willing to stapd up or raise your hand.

i know in the interest of time we won't ask even to speak, but we do enjoy strong support for this proposal and for this potential reuse of the building. thank you. vice president olague: we have a couple of speaker cards. if anyone wants to speak, you are welcome to. >> she had to leave for a medical appointment, so my apologieses. and roberto, do you want to speak? >> good afternoon, commissioners. the director of community development programs for the center and i wanted to give you a quick snapshot of the different services and programs we offer to the community. currently7% of the visitors reside in san francisco alone and we reach a diverse cross section of the lgbt community. and as rebecca talked about, we insure individual of a link to a

wide variety of services and off a safety net service program with artistic self-expression programs for homeless, lgbt use and provice programs to help individuals find employment and build their assets and also start their own small businesses and h.i.v. prevention services to newcomerses and assist families visiting the building to enjoy free child care services and that is another tie-in to a potential tenant on the fourth floor. we offer a variety of cultural and artistic exhibitions throughout the year and function as that physical space where the community comes together to celebrate our victories, to mourn our loss, and to really organize for our future. for many our services are a lifeline. this is the place that they come to to emerge from isolation and to further develop the personal and professional skills.

as rebecca talked a little bit about, the current economic climate has shrunk in public dollars for the current services. we have incredible partnerships with a variety of different city departments to support the different programs that we have. and this will really help support our efforts to focus our fundraising on our programs and services. so again, i want to thank you personally for your consideration and hope that you can continue supporting the center in this way. >> thank you. any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: thank you. i fully support the center but these questions are coming from a planning perspective. staff, i would like to ask two questions. one, why isn't this considered to be spot zoning in the sense of accommodating a very specific kind of thing through the use of a special use district?

which to me means district means district, not one particular parcel. and second question is, since this is going to be a special use district if it passes that applies to a parcel and i understand kind of the purpose behind it in the sense of being able to have the center support additional uses is that currently the zoning doesn't allow. but what ability do we have to rescind the district just for a moment and if the lgbt center goes out of business, let's say, not that it will, but we have had these situations before with

conditional uses where the conditional use goes with the property. i assume it answers here. >> i'll answer both your questions. and the first question about this one parcel and the city and the commission has authorized several s.u.d.'s to this. and 1500 page street was a special use district and a variety of others that are code that are filled with a lot of them. and this has been approved to form. and we believe that additional controlses on the top two floors and will create vibrancy to the neighboring community. if this is located on that. and allowing some of these uses

are in keeping with what's in the market octavia plan. and it is on the parcel and you are correct and there is nothing that would rescind it. and it is a planning code amendment. and i don't think that i'm not familiar with it and it would have to be formally done. vice president olague: commissioner lee? commissioner lee: i am glad he put this together because that is a key issue for the gay lesbian community on market street and octavia there. so with that, and keeping in mind we do have a business issue and this is something that we can do to help the people of san francisco and the gay community,

so i want to second it. >> i like the presentation about the multipurpose and the teaching and the gateway and all those things and was well described and greatly appreciate that and is one of the stropgest arguments. >> totally supportive of this and to the concern that was raised and with the landmark advisory board and is historically with costs that will not go away and if there was a change of ownership, it is not inappropriate to provide a vehicle for a new oeb owner to pay for the cost.

did you want to speak to that? >> and there a deed restriction that it must be a community center for 40 year. i think that speaks to some of the commissioner sugaya's questions. and we expect that will be doing this, but after 40 years and a new tenant will have to fulfill a community center requirement. i think that answers part of your question. commissioner sugaya: thank you. vice president olague: do fully support it also and is one project that's really lived up to even's expectations. i think most people in the community and even outside of it are really grateful for the center and 'ute lite iit and go -- and utilize it and go for meeting. >> call the question. >> there is a motion on the floor for approval. [calling the question]

>> thank you, commissionerses. that motion passed unanimously. and commissioners, you are now on item 10, case 2010.0113ck for 345 taylor street. >> i noted earlier we received a request from a project sponsor to move up item 15, so after 11, we will hear 15 and then take a break because it's just an informational item. it may not be -- it may be pretty fast. i don't want to keep them waiting while we go on our break. thank you. story about that. >> good afternoon, members of the planning kwigs. before you today is the project proposed to contract a partial sing single-story addition to the existing building that contains a hotel. it would accommodate a single-family dwelling unit and

965 square feet and would be setback from the roof approximately 16.75 feet which is anticipated to not obstruct the public rights of way. it would not be associated with the tourist hotel or rented as a hotel guest room. in order to allow the proposed vertical addition, the commission was include the commissioner to grant an exception to the base height limit in the 80 to 130 bulk height district. for this point the department has not received any public input regarding the proposal. staff found the project to be desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and recommends approval. the project would be consistent with existing scale development in the project area of equal or greater height. the project would expect the existing street and setting back

the addition where it is visible from the nearby public rights. and it would occur in an area sevened by several transit options and the project has been found to be consistent with planning code requirements as well as objectives and policies of the general fund. that completes the staff presentation and i'll be available for questions. vice president olague: thank you. project sponsor? >> good afternoon. i am darrin mcmarty with the architect ice office and we are proposing as part of the project to remove an existing nonconforming dwelling unit and to replace it with a new one. i think everything else is clear. vice president olague: thank you. is there any public comment? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am the director to of community leadership alieps. we're here in support of this

project. actually the project sponsor is the president of our organization. and we'd like to have him close at hand and that would give us that you want the to have him there in the community. he actually allows us to use that building for our community meetings and other community organizations as well. and we've tried to do outreach regarding this project and there seems to be no sition. again, he is a great contributor the community and working with the tepnderloin and affords us meetings and all pro bono for

free, so again, we're supporting this project. thank you. vice president olague: thank you. any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> move to approve. commissioner moore: i think it's a skillfully, tucked away building and probably not noticeable and i am intrigued by seeing something like that which is not even formed and i think it's a great move. >> commissioner, you have a motion for you for approval. [calling the question] >> thank you, commissioners. that motion passed unanimously. and president olague has indicate we're taking item -- >> we'll hear 11 and then 15. >> 11 first and then 15 and then going on break. >> commissioners, item 11, 2009.1117c, 1100 ocean avenue. >> good afternoon, commissioners. and the conditional use authorization to demolish an existing shelter and construct