previous paralyze with the lower building and this is more appropriate 2 hundred and 50 feet because of tower separation, you know, there will be distances between the towers has there should be but more comparable with the turns over on the street in the vicinity of 4 hundred feet 399 and also 340 is pretty tall and, of course, the recent completed building adjacent to it is lower because of the tower separation that's ascetically good and the second thing i think they're doing us a big favor of going in lieu tons the projects they're not being built because they're not funded

this will provide funds towards that because the mayor's office and other affordable housing builders are waiting to build these until their funded. >> as was mentioned the parking ratio is lower than the case before. i also like the way it's been designed with the par pit which not only provides short time from the wind for those up on the roof-deck by hides the mechanic equipment that is american people eye sore and from one place to another you see the mechanic features and if they can be hidden with par pits this is a step n. the juliette balconies is nicely designed they give the residents

access from different rooms and a longer balcony and they fit into the profile of the building that's much more aesthetic than the buildings that stick out and also $8 million in development fees which is a significant contribution and to the question that was raised about i'm not familiar with the studies i do know that the affinity did one with the high percentage with people that are year round residents as high as 75 percent and a lot of those people worked in san francisco and a lot more children than you except this is interesting but it is not anything we need to consider as far as the approval of this project that's a very good one.

i would move to approve >> second. and i wanted to make a note about the in lieu fee as the a nuance decision to have it on site i was reminded across the street is the transbay there are one hundred percent affordable or up to 35 percent on site this helps to justify in lieu of the fee of the site. commissioners there's a motion and second. commissioner antonini. commissioner hillis. commissioner johnson arrest commissioner moore arrest commissioner sugaya. commissioner fong. commissioner president wu. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 7 to zero so -

>> the commission will take and the variance to close the hearing noting the lot size and the typography. the commission will take a 15 minute break i want to let you know we'll be taking the agenda in numerical order so the and for the regular meeting for thursday, july 17, 2014. please aware that the commission does not permit outbursts of any kind please silence my mobile device that may sound off and

speak microphone and and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners we left off on item 9. at 1239 tucker request for conditional use authorization >> i'm sarah of the department staff on the northeast item the item to eliminate the income limitations that will facilitate at affordable housing for the commission. both the interned neighborhood tenderloin correlation and the mayor's office of housing as indicated that will not alternate the purpose they've diligently gotten the approvals for the permit. this item incorporated one hundred percent affordable housing with regards to the

planning code the inclusionary affordable housing and the department is not aware of opposition and we recommend approval thank you if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them arrest project sponsor >> good afternoon. i'm emily the social director at c nci have the project sponsor i want to take a moment to express my colleagues commitment to serving the seniors it is not it lessen the affordability of the project. the changes need because of an underwriting malice that all tax credit investors needed need to performance for any tax project

to demonstrate many the event rent subsidy is lost based on the maximum affordability restrictions all could be repaid. in their due diligence review our tax credit investor determined that the offer lay of the conditions reflected in the recorded notice of special restrictions in addition to the restricts that are already in place with the mayor's office of housing be rooiksz restrictions and the housing authority ground lease that overlay made it infeasible to make the remit so while the change to the condition about enable us to meet the writing analysis again there was not lessing of the

affordability of the project we have in place the restriction to affordability to area medium income our partnership we've forged with the mayor's office of housing for the last 40 years we can expect we consider lessening the affordability we will have demand of the $14 million or negotiate with us to extend the restrictions for another 45 years we're about to close on all the financing and start the construction so it is really unlikely that the mo h cross-examination restrictions will temperament and highly unlikely less than affordable thank you if you have any

questions, i'll be happy to answer them >> take public comment first. is there any public comment open this item? okay seeing none, public comment is closed. - oh, go ahead >> good evening, commissioners my name is ace washington first of all, i want to say hello to other commissioners that have been on other commissions and recently welcome. i appreciate the mayor appointing me to this very important commission but i'm here speaking i guess i'm requesting information i remember i'm a person that call in the know and have been over 25 years i used to stay across the street from the particular project but in time here you guys have to understand

commissioners that the people who which are going to be suffering apparently will be impacted by this whatever you're doing here but the question is what are you doing here. i mean what does the process about and i as a person in the middle i'm unclear they came up and gave you a presentation that took less than two minutes you're going to approve it but my question you all may not know housing authority is not the housing authority that will be in the next year redevelopment is not the same when i came into this 20 years ago it was the biggest development and now under redevelopment and demolished and they're going to change the housing authority but the community and the resident

you're making even though decisions have been the had a clue of what's going to go down. so i ask you when does the community and the resident get an input let's not talk about what's happened prior to now with the urban renewable we'll all know it as negro removal i've been around two 25 years i've seen them come and go but we don't have time our eras we have no, we have a c a o and department heads that are african-american but no clot in the city we're down to hear excuse me. but we're insignificant are here we have people from other criticize that

come into those housing primary for african-american but i'm here ace is on the case i is that all over the city but i'm here to find out what's going on >> thank you. thank you >> hello commissioners i'm randell evans a resident i've been here and my family goes back one hundred and 10 years i was at a metro on the rosa parks and gave us a presentation i'm like if you're familiar with the old phrase last come first served that's in the biblical i was on the list for 17 years i was a vindicate of violent crime in front of the place and nobody

take into account today, i'm concerned and very much feel imitated at rosa park they say nothing about rosa park there are tenants of the association that speak many a native tongue and continue to revote each year she can't each of but no black folks come to the meetings are able to participate and understand what's happening after the meeting and so many negligence they don't talk about walk the construction they have apartment around the development it's a very sensitive neighborhood but they talk about cail hill construction they haven't came to talk about how do we get something back where i came from you've got to come

more than just an appetite. for instance, on one side of the spectrum the management says once light house takes over the development they'll be managing it but most the residents don't understand how can you build something in front of us they've got political answers i recall on the opening from winfrey show it effects us the process takes place it is a train that is moving it wouldn't be bad to support it 23 better than on the train 40 percent of folks of african-americans here in san francisco despite of what you feel is going to happen in the housing authority it effects us i ask you to allow the process for hud to come up to the table

and slow down the train >> is there any additional public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. i want to confirm with the project sponsor so there are 97 units and they will be restricted to seniors per the federal hud remit >> correct and restricted by in case per the hoa requirement. >> correct. >> so listing the planning commission requirements didn't impact that. >> correct and do you think this somewhere will do you think projects in the pipeline will be do you think we'll change our positions going forward or specific to the investor and i don't think it's specific to the

investor they saw the notice of special restrictions there of the this blanket over b.a. lay the project as restricted for percent of the organization m i that exists in impertinent up to the time factor they couldn't finish the analysis in order to prove that all of the debt will be paid off. so with respect to will the commission go be seeing this come down the pipeline i don't know see the planning department has tried to address this in changes in the planning code; is that correct. okay >> thank you so maybe staff can add on? >> so there was a couple of instances previous to the department developing a specific

condition for one hundred percent affordable projects and the event that something does happen in the future and the condition requires the sequa sponsor to comply with the section 415 in the way 415 offers them. this is one project we're needing to change the conditions because the condition was written as the project description just because it made sense at the time there is one other project we're in the same situation that's not been classified but you'll see in the future >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. same question but let me paraphrase if i understand it correctly the lender is afraid if the project didn't meet the debt service and the project owner has to sell the project to

someone else that the new owner won't be 2k3w50g9d to keep the same restrictions? >> i'll address that again, the investor needs to do an under writer analyze that all the projects that can be repaid in the event of subsidies so it's a long-term 55 year analysis so in typically the investor would have two instruments to look at in terms of the affordability refresh my recollection what are the maximum rent to be charged based on the restrictions and how much debt service could be paid in that case pear typical instrument are the lenders restrictions and the ground lewis lease the housing

authority. our investor when we looked at this saw for 55 years the maximum income is a m i and 50 percent avenue that that in if analysis they could demonstrate at those levels the payment when we looked at the overlay of the language in the report n s r they were not able to demonstrate that >> it sound like thaib their agreeing to the same thing we put as our restrictions i don't see the change but if for some reap it goes belly up if it flips to market there should be the inclusionary. >> correct and okay. if that's the way you get the financing that's what you got to do.

>> commissioner sugaya. >> but the trigger only happens after 55 years; is that right. the 50 percent of a m i is in place for 55 years >> that's correct. >> we have a - and under their arrangement with the mayor's office. >> correct. >> so nothing b will happen to that. after that if there are an issue it goes to percent anyway but even if that's an issue the investor can raise the rents or whatever >> it's important to clarify at the end of 55 years the rent don't jump up to 50 percent of the a m i in this particular project we have a hud subsidy hates providing capital fund paying for the construction of the depth. but helping on the development side of hud that induced the

property operates at a zero income basis; right? it's income neutral. with that, in mind at the end of those 55 years zero dollars of mo h loan will be repaid so therefore the city what emily has referred to as a hammer typically the city is on the hook for that. it's typical in working with h oc d >> i was reading something that was a little bit convoluted i can read it it says the tax credit equity investor need to raise little rents and refinance

and pay off the finance debt at the end of the 55 year mo h cd for it to be considered debt for the tax program. >> correct. >> i was kind of confused by what he meant but i understand what you're saying. >> commissioner moore. >> i actually found cell phone, pager, or other similar sound-producing electronic devices. ings letter defining the 50 and 55 years this is properly underpinning what t m.d. c district attorney as a business and basically takes over a role that deals with the affordable housing so i'm comfortable and there's a motion and i'll definitely second it. >> there has not yet been a

motion and oh, commissioner antonini made it. >> no. >> commissioner hillis. >> i want to second the motion is this an equity it's not a equity investor. >> it is. given it's 55 years from now that equity investor will have a 55 year horizon but they're looking to make sure the city's funding is paid off in 55 i mean you've got to show them the city's formula is paid off in 55 years >> it's truly all debt associated with the property. in this case the way that hud capital is under written asia loan to t m.d. c you're absolutely correct the investor will exist exit the deal per tax

law 38 they need to show the time they're in there's a feasible way the debt can be repaid and that instrument is showing an increase of rents to percent to allow for the debt repayment >> it's part of the planning but in 15 years does mo h reconfigure how this the structured so they need to continue on the the 55 years. >> accident affordability restriction stays in place for 55 years. >> then it can be extend in perpetuity after the tax investor is paid off? that's all right. i, it is a

planning recommended question i kind of get that >> in please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones, we we had projects where we had extended with the restrictions before the entire term. >> before the 55 years. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. did i understand from our comments that since it's revenue neutral our not paying off the principle in the 55 years. >> that's correct. >> i've never heard of a loan like that why don't you build in something. >> it's a hud deal we have very excited to be one of the last organizations in the state is receive a hud 202 award it makes it unique the department of housing authority it provides operating subsidy, however, the development of affordable

housing is complex and very expensive so we're very, very appreciative of the mayor's office of housing alone in contribution of $14 million to the construction of the project. sound like your passing it on to the grant children and great grandchildren that's okay >> commissioner johnson. >> just briefly looking at the this one other project that will have the issue. it seems like it more of a modeling issue than anything else my question is why is it that the planning the c authorization changes are need but no need to address did practical aspect if you haven't paid off the principle it will roll offer why is it not an

issue for the modeling assumption but the planning code authorization are >> i want to be sure i understand the question why is the - >> sorry l me restate i heard you say that one of the issues with the planning language is that it plies the planning restriction is in pet up to the time, however, the mayor's office of housing community development their alone the cy licenses it's not paid off in 55 years come up with $14 million for the project rather and then the affordability restrictions roll over for another 55 years. >> in practice that's and that's what happens in practice so i guess my question on about it for the other projects this

may be a problem this question is for staff why the the planning language a problem for the modeling assumption but the practical implementation of the privileges not paid off in 55 years its not a credit equity investor problem. >> can we think about this for the next projects maybe we need to think about our process. >> that would be best answered by staff. thank you. >> thank you, commissioners there is a motion and a second to approve with conditions. commissioner antonini. commissioner hillis. commissioner johnson. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya. commissioner fong and commissioner president wu. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 7 to zero.

commissioners that will place us on item 10. at 2350 thank you, your honor restrict boulevard request for a conditional use authorization >> omar planning department. the request that i american people mobility to allow is making restraining order wireless communication facility on turk boulevard. the project site is located along the north side of turk boulevard while the site is zoned residential it is considered a preference one site by the wireless guidelines it's a publicly used structure by the san francisco department of education it will have 9 panel antennas located in 3 different

locations on the roof or sectors with 3 antennas per sector and the cabinets will be placed on the roof s back from the facade so finally, visible for the adjacent neighbor to the north. the site features an existing making facility for sprint curling working with sprint to relowest the antenna into roof mounted location for preservation guidelines. the care, he held multiple community meetings on the sf f campuses that's been withdrawn including the faculty of the university as well as community members and students. the noticing was held in residence and raised concerns about the health concerns and