customs and border protection and security rooms come install marine of equipment. and complete the improvements on the ground, which is the northeast plaza, a two-acre plaza and the crown prince -- ground transportation area. that is between pier 27 and kurt 29 area. it is an approved, we have an extremely compressed schedule to deliver it in time for the event. in order to meet the date stipulated in the host and venue agreement, the general contractor needs to place the order for steel now because of the long lead time. this process begins shop drawings, purchase of steel fabrication and installation. the poor recognizes the city may disproves the event, cruise terminal, or both event. we acknowledge to place the order now, prior to the project

approval is at some risk to the port. however, this is the best course of action because of three reasons. now is a great time to purchase the deal. prices are low and we have indications of prices will escalate. if the cruise terminal project it disapproved, the court to cancel the fabrication. 3, this lower-cost deal could be reduced. as indicated in the memorandum, no construction worker insulation will occur at the site until after the regulatory approvals are granted, including environmental review under the california quality act and the port commission and city have approved the project. for the street package, local

participation level has been set up 20% with a gold no less than 10 percent of the work hours to be performed by disadvantaged workers. local enterprise goal is 17%, but the total -- the total value of the entire contract. for funding sources, as proposed by the port staff, funding for the amended contract will be provided by culmination of the ports 2010 revenue bond proceeds for the fiscal year 2011 for capital projects in the port share proceeds from sale of the watermark condominiums. the availability and use of the watermark condominium proceeds are subject to the release of 17,000,700 $900,635 reserve by the board of supervisors' budget and finance committee. it is anticipated the item will

be heard by the board finance committee. in conclusion, for staff request for commission of an approval to the construction manager, general contractor contract, with turner construction company to provide funding for the subcontractor bid package for structural steel subject to city certification of the final eir, approval undersea sequa. >> so moved. >> second. >>commissioner woo ho: when you mentioned under option 2, how much money would be expended? you mentioned you could cancel at so -- as some point, but how much money would have been invested? to go i do not have the table, but i think the last part would be installation, which i believe

was $2.7 million. the first part of the shop drawings, which is basically engineering time of 225,000. after that the steel would be ordered and delivered to the fabricator and brought to their sight. the added labor for fabrication -- >> it would not be all this deal? then you said you could resell it if for some reason -- >> we could reuse it on other projects, but we get the most of you before it is fabricated, certainly after it is installed we only have one use for it. take a right. thank you. -- >> right. >> it is 3.7 million we would

have been advanced. i would say would be advanced for steel use somewhere else. it could be used at the back plants, pier 70, any number of places, we just would have purchased it sooner than we would have for those projects normally. on the other hand, we're trying to buy it at the low point of the price curve. and the steel could be reused? >> it is hard to say at what point we would exercise the cancel option, but the order would include purchase of raw steel and the fabrication and delivery. if at that point but project does not go forward, then we would be meeting to employ this deal elsewhere in the portfolio. if at some point the project receives approval sooner, we could exercise our

determination rights at any other point in the delivery stream. >> is there a point where it would be harder to use this field? >> it is specialized for this building, not for the site. you come put it somewhere else. it is a building that will look like the building we envision for pure 27. is that correct? >> yes. could be. >> could be, is that what you said? [laughter] what i am getting at is we would be able to use whatever funds are expended, that still could be utilized elsewhere and not be out significant funds regardless of the point in time within which we had to terminate. >> correct. there are many materials we do

inventory. we would be purchasing steel, fabricating it in a specific format and indicating it in using it in approval for other projects. the limitation would be if you build a building somewhere else, it would have to look like the building from which to fabricated the steel. does that make sense? >> i have a more mundane question. where are we purchasing the steel from? >> the lowest bidder. >> where is that currently? take a we have not gone out to bid for it yet. current bids are coming in from salt lake city agree prices, but it depends on market conditions and time.

there is no by america causes. >> i understand that. but putting people back to work might be a good thing to do. strongly consider that. >> any other comments? >> specifics with the wording of increase of funds. is this exclusively for the design and fabrication of the steel, or is there any added cost that we had already previously granted approval for? is that increase this cm -- >> there is considerable extra cost. it is approved, but not spent. in other words, we have

approved these up to a certain amount -- >> is this additional to what have been approved? >> yes. >> so they're getting paid extra for the steel fabrications component or not? >> they are getting a percentage to manage the work. it is in the initial 3.9 something. >> so it is not additive? sticker you are correct. -- >> you are correct. >> the 6,050,000 that is requested is added to the turner contract, but it will be payable to whoever supplies the subcontract? turner fees are are ready approved in the previous contract, so it is additive, but not to turner's bottom line? to go that is correct.

>> that is correct. >> any public comment on this item? commissioners, and more comments or questions? all in favor, >> the item has been approved. >> item 11, new business. any public comment on public comment? no. >> a motion to reconvene to executive session. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye.>> are we ready? >> move to reconvene in open session? all in favor? >> aye >e. >> move to adjourn?

>> second. >> meeting adjourned at 5:23 p.m.

supervisor mar: good afternoon, everyone. it looks like we have a full house. welcome to the san francisco board. my name is eric mar. i am the chair. this is our meeting of september 12, 2011. to my right is supervisor malia coehn. to my left to supervisor scott wiener. clerk: please turn off all of

your devices. supervisor mar: and i want to thank sfgtv for being with us again today. madam somera, could you please read the first item? clerk somera: i'd in number one, planning code, the zoning map, establishing the lombard and scott street affordable housing special use district. supervisor mar: i have heard that something has been filed against this. we can conduct a public hearing as we are expected to, and as an administrative meeting, we can pass it to the full board, continue the item or table the legislation, so i suggest that

we move forward with the public hearing, keeping these limitations in mind. also, and, again, cheryl adams is our city attorney. she has advised us that eight used appeal has been filed against this. today's hearing is not about the merits of the project. -- she has advised us that a u.s. appeal -- a use appeal has been filed. we all have to keep an open mind until we have seen input from the conditional use hearing, which will be held before the full board. today is about a special use district, a piece of zoning legislation that could accommodate the proposed project. the hearing is about not whether the proposed project and design is or is not a good thing. we should proceed with this hearing with those limitations in mind, and thanks to the city attorney's office for that advice. so with that, colleagues, i

would like to call up -- we have a number of people who are going to present for about 15 to 20 minutes. i just want to call up ann marie rogers from the planning department. >> i am also joined by the planning department. as chairman mar said, this is just this for the transitional, foster care, and getting ready for adult life. since the project is not before the committee today, i will address later at hearings of the full board on the commission findings that the price it is necessary and desirable for the community as well as compatible for the neighborhood, -- that the project is necessary and desirable. the secret document, we will discuss at a later hearing --

the ceqa document. this would make four changes to the existing planning law. first, it would permit up to 24 housing units in one manager's unit, where 16 units and one manager's unit would be permitted as a right. it would also eliminate the rear yard requirements, where the existing rear yard what otherwise be required, and number three, it would eliminate the open space requirements, or otherwise a minimum 675 sq. ft. of private open space and about 875 square feet of, open space would otherwise be required, and lastly, it would modify the housing units that do not face the street or alley. on june 14, the board president chiu and other board members, including kim, mar, and

mirkarimi made suggestions. some contended that this would allow too many post-foster-care youths to remain. about 16 group housing units, each of which would have two beds and one on site manager. therefore, up to 32 full-time occupants would be permitted as a right. while the associated project proposes one on-site manager and 24 housing units, or eight more units than currently allowed in the code, each unit in the proposal would only contain one bed, not two beds as allowed by the planning. there would be eight less occupants than currently allowed by the code, and one manager would be permitted at the property with this sud. this means that while this does allow eight more housing units,

the project will house eight less occupants than permitted by the code. furthermore, under the state density, a sponsor could have applied for a density increase of up to 30% over the permitted number of housing units for affordable housing. under this density, the board could have been considering a to 34 full-time occupants. however, the project sponsor chose not to pursue this avenue, and instead, what is before you is the commission-approved projects for 24 occupants as allowed by this sud, nearly half the size that could have been permitted under law. the planning department us down the density is permitted, and we recommend that the board approve the sud, and staff is available if you have questions. supervisor mar: thank you. i know from the community housing, which have some people

here, and there are others. i also wanted knowledge in the audience is someone from the mayor's office on housing, in case there are questions that come up, as well. >> good afternoon. my name is gail, with the housing. as some of you are aware, the premier provider of housing here in san francisco. we currently own or operate 1000 units, ranging from treasure island to one-third of the western addition. it was requested that people come forward, and there were some requirements. they asked that the building be small, between 20 and 30 units. they asked it would be in an untraditional neighborhood, giving preference points to projects that were not cited in the tenderloin south of market

or mission neighborhoods. they also asked that it be in a community near transit and open space. community housing partnerships scoured the city, and we found a property located at scott and lombard street, and you may say, why this building? we thought this building was perfect for this, with the understanding we would have to seek the sud. the building is being delivered vacant. there is no displacement of tenants, since it was operating as a bed and breakfast. this area is a low-crime neighborhood. i would like to enter into the record the crime statistics from september through december 2009 comparing this to the intermission and tenderloin. we also felt that the open space and transit lines, the presidio, the multiple bus routes along lombard street really made this an ideal location for young people at risk of homelessness

and exiting, and we were sure you how the redesign of the building will make it ideal. there will be 24-hour staffing at the building, lobby services from 4:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m., where every guest entering or leaving -- entering the building will have to sign in. we will have a live in manager. we have been recognized nationally as being the premier provider of property management services. we also picked a service partner who is uniquely poised to help these youth transition to adulthood and the rest of their lives, and we thought would folks paying rent that this would not be a free ride, a perfect platform for those stabilizing their lives. we really feel that this project will be successful, and to shorten the work and planning we put into the design of the building, i would actually

invite of wayne barcelona, are architect, to walk you through aspects of the property. -- our architect. >> thank you, gail. my name is wayne. i with architects here in san francisco, and we have renovated over 1400 affordable housing units in san francisco, and there are for a moderate 50 more units on board for affordable housing, so that is basically what we do. there is a site plan, going directly to the basement plan. on the basement floor plan, this is a space that is available in the building, which we are making accessible through the use of an elevator, which will connect the residential floor and the first floor with the basement. on the basement, there will be in common-use a room, which we will call the "community room," which will be for a variety of uses for the residents in the

building. we also have a restroom and bicycle storage, which we think is part of the transit plan for this building and the occupants. there will also be a laundry, and the blue part of the plan shows a limited use/limited access elevator. supervisor mar: mr. barcelona, can you again talked about the use? there is some community space for the basement that would be one of the alterations that came from some of the community recommendations? >> yes, basically, the basement is unoccupied, basically storage for the building, and by having an elevator access to the basement, we make it accessible and usable by the residents. the areas in yellow are the other common-use elements. the bathroom. the laundry. the community room. dtv area, a television lounge in that level -- the tv area.

supervisor mar: and then there is the bicycle storage and other places. this was one of the suggested changes, and this is something you are planning for the basement? >> yes, yes, and the reason for that is to relieve the pressure on the rest of the building, a small building, but it allows for more functional use, which you will see in the next drawing. when you go to the next four, this would be the ground floor. the major change to this for would be at the bottom of the drawing. -- the major change to this floor. we are relocating that approximately half way up a lot on the scott street location. what that allows us to do is take up the five different levels on the ground floor and make it single level for that for. it makes the building accessible. there is quite a bit of work being done on the ground floor

to make this an entirely accessible floor. on this floor is the primary community with spaces for the residents. if you look on the right side of the dry, you see there is a dining area and a lounge area -- on the right side of the drawing. these are kind of self- explanatory for the residence. as you enter through the door on scott street, there is a reception desk, and that is referred to as the point of entry for people to come in to make sure that they are appropriately check in and that they belong in the building. there is also a property manager offices -- office adjacent for the property management needs. in the center of the drawing are the basic youth services and tenant services. there are two areas, a work area with a copier, and there is an area which is very important

that will provide for a lot of the needs of the residents, either in group activities, educational programs, training sessions, and meetings, which will occur in conjunction with the youth services area next to that. in the upper left-hand corner is the resident manager's apartment. that is an accessible unit also in the building. associated on the kitchen side, there will be a trash room. there is a staff bathroom. which is kind of obvious in the plan. so if i can take you to the next drawing, we will take you to the residential floor. supervisor mar: mr. barcelona, dementia and accessibility, and i know that the issue of the number of accessible units has been discussed, but can you talk about what the ada and tails -- mr. barcelona, you mentioned

accessibility? >> we have four units which exceeds that. 5%. two is 5%. we have provided four units that are accessible, plus the manager. the plan with all of the blue bathrooms basically, the blue rooms, those are the rooms that have been made accessible on the second floor. this is as far as the elevator goes. the axis elevator only goes to the second floor. it serves the second, first, and basis. that is why we chose to have the accessible units on the lowest residential floor. this is also a safety thing. it is to accommodate rescue and issues with anybody who might be having problems in accessible units. so those rooms are expanded. they are reconfigured to make them accessible unit.

you go to the next plan, the next plan i will call the standard for more. basically, it is taking their regular floor that is there and making minor modifications to make those units usable. there is no a accessible units on this for more, but there will be a significant amount of improvements to these units, both for livability, air quality, and function on the third floor of the building. i have covered the full building. if you have any questions, i could answer. supervisor mar: colleagues, are there any questions? cell, seeing none, thank you for the presentation. -- so, seeing none. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i am the executive director of youth services. i want to talk about what the young people will be doing. several years ago, there was a task force established by then mayor newsom to look at the

transition-aged youth. one of the key recommendations that came out of that was the need to increase housing. we talked about 100 people as part of that task force report, and all of them talked about housing as their first-priority needs. some of the work was done, and the city had planned to add 400 units of housing by 2015, ideally, so this project is a part of that plan. the importance of having 24 units to 16 units is that at this time, there are an estimated 5700 people at risk for homelessness each year, and we are unable to meet that need. we have maybe 400 units of housing for youth, with more coming on line in the next few years, but, obviously, we do not have enough to meet the need. they will be supporting services on site. they will be engaged in a case