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. obviously we are coming out of one of the most difficult times we have had since the great depression. and crescent has taken an aggressive stance on this building. they are targeting a size and unit mix which they believe will be affordable to a wide spectrum of san francisco homeowners. they need to do that in order to make the project financeable to large scale lenders. they are trying to schedule it

for opening in 2014. that is how far out you have to project with the time for construction. this is an extremely bold move in this market to decide to build a building for 2014 that shows a great deal of optimism and hopefully wisdom in bringing these projects online at that time. we are also providing flexibility ottoset of the marketing. there are studio units and there is a possibility if a demand arises to actually combine a studio in the two bedroom to create three bedroom unit potential.

so what we are doing is keeping a maximum option available to be able to respond to the market. it is loved by the lender it is and buying community and it protects the developer as well. the units are smaller than units that have been up there and that is by conscious design on the part of the developer. that is what people have done to get in trouble on a lot of these units, they were buying gross square footage. what this developer has done and is attempting to do here is moving what would have been expensive individual unit area into common area amenities so you can have what you need but don't need to pay for it inside your unit things like business center where you can leave your unit without having to buy a

bedroom that is never utilized. it reduces the unit size, reduces the unit cost and then you can get what you need from the building. this responds to the parking exception to see the ratio. in balancing the parking interest we have clearly acknowledged the city's policy on providing less parking. even though the unit count is going up to 320 and the parking count is for 265. at the same time we are trying to satisfy the customers and the lenders. i must say unfortunately the lenders have as much to say about parking as the consumers do. one of the things that happens

when you will not have independent access to your car where it will be by means of the intermede rear it is more like car storage than parking. for the most part you are not going to make short-term trips out of a building like this but you do have to provide the car storage in order to give people a notion that they can go away on a weekend and live a life that has the great lust for our individual ownership of cars built in to make it markable and financialable. we are assuming that some of these units, particularly studios, will be sold to buyers without parking and will make full use of available public

transit. our anticipation is that people that buy two bedroom units will want a car. so that was the way we struck that balance. we are also involved in creating amenities, exception number three deals with the open space. the open space is met with an agreement that you will see after we work out the details with staff for lansing street improvements. there will be improvements built as a part of this project . you have in your booklet this image which shows the materials and the finish on lansing street. the actual required amount of space to create to satisfy the open space requirement would be the dark box.

but since it seemed ridiculous to cut it off we are extending it to first street because it is the right thing to do. now, this goes further and reflects the conversations we have had with the community. in our working with homeowners in the vicinity, one of the greatest frustrations has been expressed by the public infrastructure that was part of the plan. when we described what we were doing from lansing we heard from people why don't you do the whole thing. so, this is part of the program that was initiated. we knew that was the office that could help us and we met for the first time to answer the question, who is the we. the we was the neighborhood, the planning department and the

mayor's office are the people we met with to bring together a proposal that would allow us to use additional dollars that would be contributed to complete both guy and lansing street to the standard we are proposing for lansing street in terms of finishes. as michael spoke we had the ability to leverage another $3.9 million in bond financing for other projects. those would include street improvements, harrison street. and we can bring the total improvements between our funds that are the fee funds plus the bond funds. i think north of almost $8 million in public infrastructure, improvements

that would happen at once with the construction of the building. and our support is not lost. it is very much a function of our willingness to explore these new dynamics and vehicles for creating public infrastructure in connection with the building. we have a developer who is doing more by -- and trying to bring to the market that will actually be sold to san francisco homeowners, providing the jobs we all want to see getting back into the market, you thoroughly reviewed this design in the past. it is consistent with your unanimous prior actions. we are giving you opportunities to do neighborhood improvements. i think more than anything else it is an important signal by this development moving ahead at this time. it is a very high end big building that is going to come out of the ground and provide confidence and a na