i have paid over $40,000 in property tax. some of the things that i lot about it was a center block to allow us to get down to the embarcadero safely. this was my decision. i am excited to hear what the previous presenter was talking about. and the next presentation, i will make some comments specific to the developer of the issues that they have on their previous project which is the metropolitan and serious

unfinished business with respect to that. we have to do something to deliver to this. people come here to make it a community and i am particularly concerned about first street. there is a divide between this project and the rest of rencontre hill -- rincon hill. >> it is there additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i have a question.

we had this discussion with treasure island. i would assume that the 57 sense that we're able to utilize this is a product and we can utilize a higher percentage if we were able to use these for -- is that true? >> we are in the best position of any city in the state. we have 57 cents to play with. many cities have even less. assuming that we development goes away, san francisco is actually in the best position to do the public improvements because most of the other cities don't have enough of a share.

we're actually in better shape. this is applicable to any that might occur within the city and county of san francisco. this is not just restricted to a certain one. that advantage exists anywhere in the city. >> there is an argument that we can increase the percentage up to about 64%. 65% if it is diverted before it is sent to the three special funds. this ranges from 57 cents to

about 64 cents that we have to use. >> the timing might make it a higher percentage. you pointed out very well that part of this will be specific to the area in question which is a large amount but then as time goes on, the funds flowed into the general plan which is the vast majority generated by the tax increment created becomes the lion share of what is produced. we are not doing this at the expense of the general fund and it allows us to divert a significant amount into the improvements. >> our fiscal impact study was done as part of the lengthy hearings which was peer reviewed

by the comptroller's office. and there is also the additional costs related to fire, public health. all which will be accretive for the city. we all sympathize on this. a portion of the money would have gone towards accelerating development of that public improvements, those trees, those parks and that sidewalk. i would like to say that the whole purpose of this partnership is to address what we believe is a deficiency. we have a great plan but we have

not been able to implement much of the plan. this would address the concerns of the residents like that gentleman, jamie would occur, everyone else waiting for those changes. >> the requirement is that these improvements are made. you get those improvements at the front and rather than when the units are sold or these other things that had to do with it the earlier ways that infrastructure improvements were made. >> yes, we will try to get more of them on the front and through this partnership structure. our office along the comptroller's office, plan department, budget office, is

who we mean by "we." >> i see that -- is included even though the entitlements occurred earlier. i would assume that an existing project would not be part of the ifd. >> , only future projects. this is not within the area plan, it was a special used district. those people need sidewalks. it would be helpful for them to contribute towards the build out. that was a distinction i am trying to bring up because i remember this coming up as a

separate entitlement. i think the concept here is that it would be included because it would be part of the ifd. it would do its part to continue. we would need approval of the property owners and that is how these work and they have to vote over the residents. >> the property owners voted on this. when they approved the formation, there was also a vote that happened to be 100% approval. those for the 17 parcels that i mentioned. this has a lot of potential. i want to point out to the public, it is important to note

that each one is specific to its area for this even if it does not preclude agreements that were made that only for the general fund but also in general, this is a means to direct its towards the area as opposed to situations where moneys are taken out and used in other areas that might be adjacent to somewhere else in the city. >> this can only be spent on the projects that are outlined in the infrastructure financing plan which it serves as the constitution for this and that list that i showed you, those are the only projects that can get funded. those are the projects that this commission approved as part of the plan. >> we know from our discussion last week that these cannot be part of a redevelopment agency.

at least they cannot become ifd's right now. >> if you are in redevelopment area, either currently where in the past, you cannot form an ifd. >> can you clarify the bonding limit. is that specific to this? >> that is specific to the rincon hill ifd. there are estimates for our

portion. we wanted to have a contingency. if the construction costs or more expensive, we would like to bond a bit more. >> the 3.9 million associated, that would come out of the -- >> yes, that would count against that cap. >> the 3.5 million would go to the other improvements that are part of the plan. >> if you turn to page two of the memorandum i have given you, we're calling this a work

in progress. this is one of the most important things to be done with the planning department leading which is prioritization of all of those facilities. ultimately, it will be the city dictating which happens first. if there is a pedestrian safety need on the intersection of first and folsom, for example, we need to be able to prioritize how the bill that occurs based on independent criteria. that is actually part of the partnership and that work will be done by the planning department staff. >> if this was successful, we would be looking at doing this with other developers in the area. >> that is our hope. if we can get the first several

projects moving forward, we would be very close to having completed the round. this is within five projects. >> this sounds great. i would like to ask you about in the actual cost of this mechanism. you mentioned that the bonding would spend 30 >> depending on s it issued. the problem as they exist under the current law is that you only have 30 years from the date of the formation of the district and not even the issuance of the bond. if it took another five years for us to find a project and to

find a bond purchaser, that bond would necessarily be limited by the light and it would only be 25 years to amortize the cost. >> the real question is for me. there is the face value of the bond and at the end of the bond, there is the actual cost. how much in reality does it cost at the end? you have the bond and the save the value of these products. how much in reality is the actual cost of what you are buying? >> we have the infrastructure plan approved by the board. to give you an example --

by the way, this is a new financing mechanism and you are all aware of that. this situation is different than treasure island where you have a huge area that represents the bond. what we don't know yet is the interest rate. the interest on that mortgage that a private bond buyer will pay. for most of our calculations, we have assumed an 8% interest rate. we have assumed that because we wanted to be conservative and not assume the better rate. part of the purpose of the partnership is to get some bond sales out there so that other investors can see that this is not that the novel of a concept. this is like a bee development bond. essentially, and investors can be like sheep.

they want to see if someone else has done it. part of the partnership is to try to facilitate those early on sales so essentially the borrowing costs go down over time. the estimates we have for this financing district, this is assuming about a $15 million total bond issuance. we anticipate that principle and in interest, the life of this district, the total cost would be about $31 million. >> that is relative to the high cost, there might be ways for you to lower the finish point. how many of these bond issues as urgent as we have other areas can any one city undertake at

one time. is there a limit to that? >> the board of supervisors passed to approve the issuance. there is no technical limit. theoretically, if we had these over the city, these could be issued as bonds as the increment develops. the paradox is the more of these bonds that are sold, the more marketable they are and the more competitive the interest rate. >> that is based on the belief system that you think that high debt is positive because you are showing results. >> anytime you borrow to buy now, you have to pay interest.

implicit in any project, whether it is a revenue bond for a parking garage or a redevelopment finance bond. like any other financing vehicle, there is interest involved. i think that the question is, would they be there it -- would they rather seen happen sooner rather than later? >> i appreciate you explaining. >> this is not a redevelopment area the types of funding mechanisms we're talking here is pretty typical of what we saw inside of the redevelopment areas to do these types of developments. i wanted to make sure that you knew based upon the earlier comments that the department is very much engage with this.

this whole idea of this is a way to implement the department and the commission's plan and this is certainly a funding mechanism to talk about what many people in this room have been talking about since i have been here or even longer. it is important for us to talk about how this will work. this is important that we are very much engaged in this discussion and these are the improvements that the plan calls for. >> this has been in place for quite some time.

it looks like it is going away. there's great interest in this approach. >> there has been some uses of this, maybe not locally. >> attack increment financing is a broad concept that has been used all of the country. this is used in canada. this is not a radical concept. this is one way of doing tax increment financing. other states have either lost. chicago uses a different form. tax increment financing is a very old concept. >> this has been in place for a while although not utilized

widely. this is not like we are creating anything new. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> that the recession. i could remind everyone to turn off cell phones and pagers before the sound of during the proceeding. you are now on item 11 for 45 lansing street. >> good afternoon. the project before you isor 45 lansing street, which falls in the ringon hill district -- rincon hill district. modification of the project was

approved in 2007, and extensions in 2009 and 2010. the request before you today is a modification of the project approved in 2007 that would keep the previously approved height, and exterior design, but the interior of the project in the following ways -- dwelling units would increase from 227 to 320. parking spaces would increase from 227 to 265, although the parking ratio would decrease. car shares bases would increase from one to two. -- car share spaces. bicycle spaces would increase from 69 to 93. open space would be somewhat decreased from 32,000 square feet approximately to approximately 27,000 square feet. the number of studio units would increase from 3 to 99, and the ratio of 2- and 3-that renewed its would drop, bof two-bedroom.

the original project received exceptions for parking, residential and public open space, and dwelling unit exposure. modified project before you today requests the same exceptions, although with somewhat different parameters. additionally, the sponsor still intends to meet the affordable housing requirements. regarding public comment, since the original case report was released from the department received two e-mails and one phone call with concerns about pressures and parking, and the lack of open rum in the area. we also received italy will letters of support, one from the rincon hill neighborhood association and second from a neighboring residents. -- is estimated to contribute $3.9 million in infrastructure impact fees, and nearly 5 million in stabilization fund fees. as discussed earlier, the sponsors intend to satisfy some or all of their requirements of the rincon hill fees.

the improvements would generally intend to implement street improvements, identified in the area plan. the project sponsor and city are still quarter ending on the design, valuation, and terms of the agreement, and the project sponsor will return for a fee waiver and return when the schematic design and agreement are finalized. this concept in coordination with the mayor's office of economic and workforce development, are outlined as additional conditions of approval, two of them, which were sent to the commission last week for your review. planning department recommends approval of the project with conditions based on the fact the proposal is consistent with the planning code, rincon hill plan, and general plan. is well-designed and will contribute to the area, it will add a significant number of dwelling units, and it will

make significant contributions to infrastructure improvements in the immediate area and general improvements to the larger soma neighborhood. that concludes my presentation, and i am available for questions. >> thank you. project >> is this getting bigger? >> let's see. >> so i am not going to get it. i will work on that later. i will slide it around. actually, you have all of this in the booklet. i am representing 45 lansing street development l.l.c., it

is affiliated with crescent heights, a marketing company that's brought more than 70 high quality urban projects to homeowners. crescent heights has been the recipient of numerous design and development awards including a gold medal award of excellence for the metropolitan in san francisco. actually the quality of their product can be evidenced by reviewing the five-star reviews. i am just going to read two or three quick ones because they pertain to their strategy of how to bring affordable units to the market. if you are looking for a modern place that is affordable, come here. i live in this luxury high rise and i really love it. another says the convenience that the provide is utterly invaluable.

facilities are great. it is well done. what you are hearing is a mix of quality with afford ability. and that is why we have substantial community support. the neighborhood association submitted a letter. i actually gave an additional letter to linda today for distribution. and they are favoring this project as it has been favored in four prior votes unanimously for the quality of the building. for the realization of the plan. the architecture retains the project that was unanimously approved in 2007. the cite is a preferred tower cite and it blends with the existing context. it is providing a scale on

lansing street which would be to the back of the building. this is the harrison street. and the way that it provides that is that it has a lot of detail. the building actually has two faces, the harrison side is the more urban side. that is where all of the vehicles come in and the loading comes in. when you get to lansing it is a finer detailed scale. like many of the better designed buildings, it is a building that has a lot of different aspects to it or prospects to it as you look at it from different positions. one of the elements that i want to draw your attention to is the first exception, which is the exposure exception. i don't know if you are familiar with the -- there is a

little union gas station on the corner adjaceant to the project and they hike on that site to 65 feet. the exposure requirement actually deals with distance -- deals with exposure from the lot line. and the reason that this exception has been approved every time previously is that with a 65-foot height limit you won't even reach the lower podium of the building. all of the units above will have exposure even though it is situated where it is. this building has gone through two different designs. it was extended again in 2009 and 2010. but the magic of developing a high rise building is really how you approach the market.