supervisor mar: the meeting will come to order. this is the regular meeting of the san francisco board of supervisors land use and economic development committee. i am supervisor eric mar. join me today is supervisor cohen and supervisor wiener. clerk: please turn off your

equipment. supervisor mar: where is the overflow meeting? could you please call item no. 1? we have six items. clerk: this is to change the sidewalk. supervisor mar: thank you. do we have a representative of dpw? >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am from the department of public works. this legislation in front of you is to establish a new sidewalk along clearance place. this is for the development of 177 towson street. this is part of the developer and. the legislative requirement requires passage by the board of supervisors in this place. supervisor mar: let's open this

up for public comment. is there anyone who would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, can we move this forward with a positive recommendation without objection? thank you. ms. somera, please read item number two. clerk somera: item number two, an ordinance amending the regulating the with of sidewalks section 1588. supervisor mar: sir? >> this is a planning requirement as part of conditions of approval, and as part of this legislation again, it needs final board approval. supervisor mar: thank you. thank you for being so short and sweet about this, as well. colleagues, if there are no questions, let's open this up for public comment. sir?

>> good afternoon, supervisors. steve, on behalf of the project sponsor of 800 brotherhood way. as he said, this was a condition of approval for the project. this was approximately 170 units of residential development on brotherhood way. the project sponsor an architect are here if you have questions, but what this does is allows them to improve the sidewalk, and it was a condition of approval of the planning commission approval that we do this action. it was from 2005 on a neg dec appeal. thank you. supervisor mar: is there anyone else from the public who would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed colleagues, can we move this forward with a positive recommendation?

could you please read item number three. clerk somera: item number three, a jurisdictional transfer an exchange of city property, ocean avenue note -- ocean avenue and phelan avenue. >> good afternoon. this item is one of a series of items that the board has seen relative to the redevelopment of property near the intersection of phelan and ocean. this exchange facilitates for the development of the san francisco community college holdings in north of the project. it also expedites future alternative uses of both the sfpuc land and the land of the college in the future.

this would be a to be created plaza adjacent to the house and elements along ocean avenue. i am going to put up a map here for you while i continue. the terms of that lease agreement have been finally negotiated, and the college board approved it. next, to the sfmta board and this board, so we wanted to conclude those negotiations before bringing the package to you. this is really the keystone part of this legislation, so if we're going to go to the detailed proposal, i also want to thank the college senior staff and outside counsel for their sincere effort to move these items forward over a number of years and for their

patience as we work with all of the pieces of legislation to move this forward, so before you today are the following, and as this map, clearly and meticulously details, because it is a little confusing, we will run through the bullet points, it is about seven square feet of land from the sfpuc to the mta. it is a transfer of 6264 square feet of land from asset mta to the puc to further the subsequent exchange between the city and the college. which is also an item before you. that item is an exchange of 6.21 acres of city-owned land in the 6264-foot parcel from the sfpuc to the college in direct exchange for 6.6 acres of land from dulles to the sfpuc. the to the consideration of other requirements. i will spell those out a bit for the record for you.

they are approximately valued at $37 million. this is an even, no cost exchange to either party. so the terms of the exchange, let me very briefly sure you a before and after that i think will be clearer than this rather tactical map. so this is the before situation. sfpuc is ownership is to the north. , the other to the south, and we are transferring some lands to create the future of busted project and a connection with the ocean, which is currently disconnected. >> so mr. updike, the bus is going to go around the fire station, so it will go on ocean, koran around, come out on phelan, and come back around?

>> yes. now, the split is east-west, rather than north-south. re quickly, the points are that this is a direct, no-cost exchange between the parties. grants and reservations of easements for water pipeline and access rights necessary for existing and future development, adjustments to or termination of the existing lease and exchanges with the bookstore property which lies between this new roadway, north of the fire station but south of the newest development on city college preparatory, and the city property at 17th and folsom, where the college will waive their rights to profit sharing from the relevant sale of the property. there is a closing with an m.o. you between the college sfpuc. it includes an agreement that the college should reimburse the city 50% of the total costs for reinforcements should a

water reservoir be located on the city property in the future, now that we have a new dividing line between the two properties. there could be that even a relative. we have tried to anticipate that in that agreement and that the cost sharing agreement which brings us towards that even exchange, and then finally, requirements for the college to construct the access way to the city's satisfaction at the expense of the college, and that runs up this east-west line and for the college to maintain that until there is support for said maintenance. the city may accept the access way into the city system, but that decision will be at the city's discretion in the future, so the jurisdictional approvals were received on fidrych 10, 2009, and by the as the mta board in 2009. it was approved by the college board of trustees in 2008, the transfers along with the exchange agreement fell to be in accordance in a letter from the

planning department dated november 5, 2010. both the jurisdictional transfers and the exchange system with the ballpark system area plant and its environmental findings, as adopted by the planning commission on december 4, 2008, and as further with an ordinance. so we secured a positive recommendation for approval of the jurisdictional transfer is in the even exchange agreement with city college. we have representatives of city college year as well as from the office of economic and work force development should you have any questions. supervisor mar: thank you. actually, i did have one question. it is the puc and a major -- major land swap, but there is also mta owning a number of parcels of property in the main area around the bus turnaround, and then there is also the fire department to the east, or the

southeastern corner. which entity will maintain the main plaza area that is sandwiched between the affordable housing and the fire station? >> so i have a blowup of the area on the overhead, if we can turn to that. the fire station is in red. the current bus flipped, the two parcels to be exchanged, to allow mca to control the section in order to allow the looping through as part of a new facility here, and this is part of the transfer from the sfpuc and city college, but mta will eventually control this land between the fire station and the current bookstore, and the plaza itself is a separate agreement which will come to you subsequently. this is as soon as the sf mta

board will take action on that because that is on their property, and they need to authorize that long-term lease, and then they will bring that least to you, and that would be a city college meet its obligation created through joint approvals. supervisor mar: ok. thank you so much. colleagues, if there are no questions, from the office of economic or work force development or john rizzo or if others what to make comments before we open it up to public comment? >> good afternoon, chairman, members. i jameyson with the office of the work force development. we have worked with all of the city developments and the city college to the coordinate this agreement with the last several years, and this is very

important for city college to be able to expand their current campus. it is very important for the city and county of san francisco also to be able to complete the exchange is necessary for the phelan loop development, and as you also now, the affordable housing is also connected. we support this proposal, and we look to your support, as well. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you, and things for the great affordable housing grunted there, as well, to others. trusty rizzo, did you want to make some comments? >> thank you, mr. chair, supervisors. i would like to thank the mayor's office of the work force development, a supervisor elsbernd, and the many others

that have helped us to come to this point. there is a certain urgency in this, and that is the performing arts center, which we would like to be built on this land. the performing arts center is eight multimillion-dollar public project that will employ 32 will create hundreds of jobs, many of those san francisco jobs because city college as a two- year-old local hiring policy that is working very well in chinatown, so this is not just a city college issue. i believe it is an issue for the economy of the city of san francisco, and the urgency is that this $90 million project is funded with $30 million with state funding which was just put into the budget, that the governor just signed. the problem is, we do not have title to the project. we could lose that $30 million,

and then the project is dead, so we urge that your committee pass this and that the board passed this as soon as possible. it is not a controversial project. there is no one who opposes it. it will help educate the youth of san francisco. 70 percent of our students are synthesis the students, so it is a win-win-win all around, but the urgency is that we need to have this approved quickly so that we can have ownership of the $30 million. supervisor mar: where is the center going to be? is it on phelan? that is what the pc used to use of the balboa reservoir? >> yes. can we put this back up here? it is in the middle. right now, we have a new building that is currently on city college property, but this is puc property where the performing arts center would go, and this is an shovel ready

project. the drawings have been approved by the department of state architecture, so we could possibly start this project by the end of the year, which is a very exciting prospect. supervisor mar: thank you so much. colleagues, let's open this up for public comment? are there any members of the public who would like to speak? but i have several speaker cards first. [reading names] >> share of the music department at city college. yes, it is a project that we have been waiting for as long as i have been at the college, which is 1965. the students of city college, we wanted an auditorium. we are the only institution i

know what that does not have this kind of facility. we are in incomplete campus, listed that way in the state community college system. we have over 5000 head can students in the performing arts. we are squished into place that was built for 400 students, so it is long overdue, and we have very talented students. there is so much interest in this project. the building is beautiful. it has won awards are ready. it is a highly environmentally friendly building. the hvac system is already in place, because the building that is already built in the south part of the reservoir, the north-south access, contains the hvac unit for both buildings. the buildings also concede to form a friendly walkway inside the two buildings to get from public transportation on ocean, a cross because the gap, which

is terribly witty and terribly cold and terribly awful, so people can take public transportation, walked inside both buildings using a common access and walk away interior to get them safely to the northern part of the campus, so at the tree -- as the trustees said, this is definitely a win-win. the students are extremely anxious, if only, for example, for our 5000 students. we have seven practice rooms. this is so under code for performing arts students, and we desperately need these facilities as soon as possible. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. so if anybody else has been called, i think one gentleman and others -- if there is anyone else who would like to speak, please come forward. >> yes, tom, an elected member of the board of directors, and i have been participating as such in the balboa park planning for

over a decade, and i am actually a really sad to see this year to date. there is an enormous lost opportunity for the city with this land swap as it has been constructed. the neighborhood, when we started the process over a decade ago, really wanted a transit village along the bart system, so the triangle created by geneva, ocean, and san jose, there is a huge muni maintenance facility constipated -- occupying the middle of this. this is a very unsafe area to walk or to cycle through. the best spot for a new transit maintenance facility in this whole neighborhood, one of the only large available sites, 01 if there was a new and unique maintenance facility underneath this, then we would not have to build another one, but for

whatever reason, this as just not been able to surface. i think the planning department at the time squash the idea. everyone freaked out about it every time its rates, so i am here raising it, because we really have an obligation to the neighbors to get this plan right, and the best ideas have not been vetted. in terms of a location for the performing arts center, i think the best location is directly on top of the bart station. we have one, called the upper yards site. it is where these areas come together. it is a fantastic sight. it is very transit accessible and would heighten the area, as the neighbors want. we are putting this facility way above phelan area, which is a bit of a hike, and we are not

putting it in an area where it would help revitalization, so it is a really sad example to me of the difficulty in trying to move public agency is you really are looking at their own interests and not at creating a better whole, so i do not know if there is a way to investigate what i have just talked about, but i think it would be the best outcome for the city and not lose us an opportunity to create a really, really great transit village. this is the fifth busiest station in the bart system and a major, major mode in the muni metro system. unless we do something creative with the site, it will continue to be a not a great place. it will never be the transit village neighbors want it to be. so hoping that we can get a look at this time out before being dragged on this, thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. i will check in with supervisors avalos and elsbernd to see if we

can look into those. next speaker. >> i am with city college. i just wanted to make sure we get a couple of things on record in light of what you just heard. one, the college itself with three master planning process with multiple public hearings on this exact plan to build on the reservoir site, complying with ceqa. since then, there have been many hearings of the board of trustees, where this item has been noted for discussion numerous times, including the agreements that have been referenced by the city officials today, so there has been a very long public bidding process on the city college side to move forward with this. suddenly, it is important to note that the location of the performing arts student is in exactly the right place for the students. what it is for the vast majority of hours that it is open is a

auditory building. there are students taking classes nearby, so there is a matter of students to not be going from the bart station all of the way over. it would just be impractical. if you ever look at the city college classes, you literally had areas where students could not get to their classes in time because they were so far away. thank you. supervisor mar: surplus >> i am with the san francisco building and trades council. i was going to get a sigh of relief to finally testify on a project that had no controversy, and then he talked about the controversy. we have had it specifically in an agreement we have had with the college for six years now, and we have been looking forward to doing it all of that time. i think the same type of creativity that he called for to

put housing on top of this site could easily serve the existing new york, which is actually quite a bit closer to the bart station, and i look forward to there being another performing arts venue in san francisco, again for somewhat selfish reasons, because we look forward to the work here. i have a son is a musician who would like to have another venue to perform. , i appreciate your interest, and let's move this project forward. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. circus >> ♪ you can put the property here education is to care and knowing that land, land never dies and the students do try, and i hope you will always care you can put the land everywhere

in you will always share and i know that you will be there here, there, and everywhere you could put the land here, there, and everywhere, as long as you love and care and share. you will know that love will be there ♪ supervisor mar: thank you. >> my name is -- and i am representing the ocean avenue area in formerly. i think the city and college are ready to move ahead. i also think that the gentleman is correct, that there has been some poor planning cooperation

in the past, but not only do we have the plans ready for the college part of the reservoir, but we also have the plans ready and funded for the most part for the phelan loop project in the new muni turnaround. i think there is opportunity for more coordination and planning for what is going on around the balboa bards station, which, perhaps, this committee could help facilitate, but i think in terms of the land trade, which has been -- which has been in the works since 2002, we need to move ahead so we can get it will thing going. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. is there anyone else you would like to speak? thank you. >> my name is davis. i in the interim dean at city college of liberal arts. i wanted to show you a drawing of the building we are

discussing this is the building that would be in the middle of the block, the middle of the property that was referred to earlier. it houses our theater department and our music departments. it is approximately 5000 students. our students have been working in extreme, extreme difficult situations for decades now. we have almost 5000 music students and only seven rooms for them to practice in. as you can imagine, the expansion here to over 50 practice rooms is very exciting to our students, as is the possibility of rehearsals basis for our drama students, and for the first time, we will have a concert hall for the many programs, a concert hall that can also be used for our dance department and our some of the department, and i will note that sentiment is one of the professional job training areas

of city college, in cinema is growing. it is an area of growth, an area where we can see our citizens' study at city college and moved into a very exciting in lucrative profession, so i encourage the group to please pay us this resolution. our students have been waiting for a long time. >> .-- supervisor mar: thank you. if there is no one else wants to speak, let's close public comment. colleagues, can we move this forward with a positive recommendation without objection? thank you. thank you everyone for coming out. ms. somera, could you please call item no. four? clerk somera: item number four, a hearing regarding the regulations for issuing an exploration permit. supervisor mar: thank you, and