city or county of san francisco one thing that we are asking dhr to do is to report to us in june 2016 its findings and its plan. i do want to take this opportunity to also thank supervisor cohen and supervisor kim in their work to a lemonade in criminal background history. our city employees more than 30,000 full-time and temporary employees. research have shown that implicit bias is negatively affect all candidates with ethnic sounding names. in fact, in one study the national bureau of economic research applicants with white sounding names have a of a 50% or call back for interviews than those with black sounding names. there is a hiring process based on names associated with a certain gender. there is a study done by yale university that demonstrated that faculty participants rated male

applicants more significantly competent and higher ball than the identical female applicant for a lab manager position. it even recommended lower salaries. i'm really glad to hear that the department of human resources has already begun this work to eliminate this explicit bias in these cities hiring practices. i look forward to their work and their results that they will share with us in june. >>secondly, in 8th on a fun note i am introducing a resolution of our gold warriors with 72 wins during our 2015 2016 mba season we wish our team the best of luck i certainly or by to amend this resolution next week for another win hopefully. on a more sad note i do want to request that we close out our meeting today in honor of someone's father we all know

teddy but hey s of at&t and her father michael bass passed away just recently. he was someone that was born in san francisco and grew up going to balboa high school he attended san francisco state university before serving our country he is head of 6 infantry regiments. after honorable discharge from the arnie mr. bass went home to start his own construction company of 50 years. he actually also had built-- he had overseen the reconstruction of the annunciation greets orthodox cathedral after the 1989 earthquake. i just want to share my grievance with the family and i would like to adjourn in his honor. >>mdm. clerk he please call items 20 and 21 >>is anordinance approving an

amendment to the redevelopment plan for the transbay redevelopment project area, to increase the maximum height limit from 300 feet to 400 feet on block 1 (assessor's block no. 3740, lot nos. 027, 029, 030, 031, and 032) within zone one of the transbay redevelopment project area; and making environmental findings under the california environmental quality act, and findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1. and item 22 iskimordinance approving an

amendment to the redevelopment plan for the transbay redevelopment project area, to increase the maximum height limit from 300 feet to 400 feet on block 1 (assessor's block no. 3740, lot nos. 027, 029, 030, 031, and 032) within zone one of the transbay redevelopment project area; and making environmental findings under the california environmental quality act, and findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1. the following items will be considered by the land use and transportation committee at a regular meeting on monday, april 11, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. the chair intends to request the committee to send the following items to the board as a committee report on tuesday, april 12, 2016. >>after expensive negotiations in the fall when the developer asked to increase the height of the project by 100 feet and conformance to many other residential buildings in this neighborhood the project grew to 391 units and we were able to negotiate 40% and middle income households earning

between 80 and hundred and 20% of average income. for the layperson for a family of 4 it's between 80 and $120,000 per year. this is actually the very type of housing the city will not build enough of. this is for households that are nurses or teachers or 1st responders are entry-level workers and frankly even our entry level task workers. affordable units after negotiation will be disbursed within the 1st 26 floors of the tower. the town houses and the podium building or ensuring there is diversity throughout the entire development. we also negotiated an insurance from the developer that all the amenities would be shared equally by the resident without a core door or 2 tiers of amenities based on income in this project. >>height on any project is

always a source of controversy in any neighborhood in we confirm more value on a land we want to assure that we are working with the developer to share that value back with the community. so with the 73 additional housing units that will be allocated to this tower with the additional height space 60% of the new additional units will be affordable to middle income households. this project ensures that weight me assembly bill 812 and the redevelopment plan requirements to provide 35% affordable units within trans bay. i just recognize state sen. john burton would produce the highest level of affordability of any san francisco redevelopment plan. this also loves generate funding for the trans bay center which is currently under construction. this is the 1st market rate project in the trans bay area

plan. this will provide more than 30% affordability on site. the developer has committed to spend $120 million to build the 40% that we've asked them to do of which the oci i is providing 19.1 million. all of our development projects have given us the highest level of a affordability to provide this would only achieve 42% with the puppy contribution. that is my points. i know there were several russians that were raised at the commission hearing last week in regard to how we achieve this 40% with the use of tax increment dollars typical of a redevelopment area plan. i had mentioned that again the development is the development is committing to 120 million which 19 million would be committed by tax dollars. if we did not provide this is subsidies of bio cii we would have 127. so without further

comments i would like to open up to our department oci i to present on the details of this project before us. >>thank you supervisor kim. >>thank you mme. supervisor supervisors i'm shane heart for the redevelopment plan for trans day. the board of supervisor actions would be to amend the plan to up to 400 feet. this slide provides the background of the trans-bay redevelopment plan adoption with the community input the redevelopment plan was adopted in 2005. the gray area in the middle the slide is the trans-bay redevelopment plan area and the boundary follows the plated conditions in the area of the redevelopment area

is divided into 2 zones guide one is the design control and the design guidelines and within zone 10 cii has land-use jurisdiction. in zone 2 the zoning is to the planning code and they are subject to a delegation agreement between them and oci i. the plan was adopted in 2012 and substantially increased building heights in the area. trans bay has some challenging affordability requirements. there is an area wide trans bay requirement where 35 of all units are built to be affordable however the redevelopment plan requires that an individual budget provide 15 percent of a

affordability. this has to be a negotiator handled by ocii. within the all in one there is 132 units and 600 of those units are complete and 1200 are approved are about to begin construction. for those projects that were approved or complete the board of supervisors has approved all of the 33433 reports addressing fair market value. this just gives you an overview of trans bay zone one. trans bay block one is located on fulsome street between maine and steer. >>this shows the proposed development program oci i owns the top two thirds of the site

about 4000 ft.2. oci i purchased the site in 2003 for afforble housing. the bottom one third is earned by fisher and spire. due to housing these have to be developed together they cannot be developed separate. >>there will be 391 units and 156 will be available for households at 80% 220% ami. with the benefit of the height increase we have been able to increase 26 floors of tower.. this slide shows the differences between 300 foot height project in a 400 feet height project.

>>this slide breaks down the 40% affordability. of the 391 total units as i said hundred 56 will be affordable. of the 156 80 of the affordable units are in a tower and the townhomes those will all be funded by the developer. out of the 76 affordable units in the podium buildings those will be funded by 19.18 million subsidies by oci i and the remaining podium costs are funded by the developer. >>can i ask a quick question about the affordable units? will we be able to since they are funded by the developer not necessarily the federal government to use neighborhood precedents for those particular units? >>i can have the tiffany bo hee

the director of oci i come up and address that with you now. >>good afternoon's supervisors my name is tiffany bohe with the oci i. there may be other preferences adopted by the board or commission that will be in effect at the time. >>okay thanks. >>regarding the land fair market value the state law requires that the land be sold for fair market value. i draft 33433 report has been included in the file. a final 33433 report will be coming to the supervisors in july oci i is

receiving a consideration of 50.2 million consisting of land price of 19.2 million; and 17 million for the developer to increasing percentage of affordable units in the project to 35% to 40% availability. if we compare the consideration for block one to that we received for block 8 that was just disclosed in december 2015 you can see that although the total consideration for block 8 is higher the per unit consideration is much lower due to the zoning allowing a much higher unit count on block 8. for block 9 the total consideration is actually lower

the unit consideration is much higher and we did a much higher unit count on block 9. with that i ask jose campos the manager of plan and design review of community investment and infrastructure, been talk to you about that. >>good afternoon supervisors my name is josé campos the manager of plan and design review of the community investment and infrastructure committee. we are going to talk about 3 items this evening the 1st item will be there reform and the 3rd

item will be the rendering of the 400 foot tower as seen on beale street this is the proposed trans bay park this is the site of the current temporary trans bay terminal between maine and beale street and fulsome and howard streets and 1st i would like to share with you just a glimpse of what we looked out in our analysis and what are impact to be on our surrounding neighborhoodin particular this building will be surrounded by high risesand we it will be surrounded by this type of environment we found a significant impact of thepedestrian view is among the embarcadero walkway at the

park. this is just one vantage point that we selected to show your. this is that same advantage point with the proposed projects that are currently in the pipeline to the north of the 75 howard project. and behind the gap building which is the building here on the center on the corner of folsom and newmarket arrow if we look at simulations of a threat of a tower is seen from the reno park area. this is from a 400 foot height you can begin to see this tower as it protrudes behind the gap building. the towers located on folsom street between spear and main streets. is actually one block behind the embarcadero roadway. for our discussion about how this building contributes and impacts the san francisco

skyline's i'm presenting to you the height map. the height map basically shows you treat the trans bay block one building behind the gap one building. i like it here at 400 feet. to the north of trans bay though in one district which is a long folsom street we have a transit center district plan area. that transit center district plan area was rezoned in 2012 to basically take much more density and transit oriented development around the transit area. some of this district is a sales force tower and that is at 912 feet and that is the height of the roof of the trans bay sales 4th tower but with all the architectural projections this height is actually a 1070. the south of

this district is the green con plan area basically this map demonstrates the tapering from the tower to the north down towards the waterfront and from green con hill to the south towards the block one project area. the brief elements of the urban form analysis that i want to share with you that we have considered looking at the city's gen. plan and urban design element of the general plan in particular but also the transit center district plan. the 1st element of urban design that we considered was accentuating the cities' by building higher heights at the

hilltops. the higher heights at the hilltops is visible in particular on green con hill. for that reason that green con hill plan shine shows that hundred and 50 feet in terms of the financial district we have the downtown mound which is showing the height of the sales force tower. the 2nd principle that we looked at was the principle of being down the waterfront. with this height map we will show you that basically there is a band of buildings downtown at the city's downtown edge which is along the embarcadero. the gap of building which is in front of the clock one building which

is at the highest point which is 289 feet and then you have this building is between 2 and 3 in her feet and then the 3rd aspect we looked at was the idea of a saddle. it is a saddle that is differentiating the pursuant of the transits of our district plan. the recon help plan for the south and it cites essential reading the topography of recon hill and the downtown mound and the high-rise district surrounding the trans bay terminal. so, when we look at the urban form we basically see it from the bay bridge. this is the existing view from the bay bridge of the area. you could see the gaba building at the waterfront edge there is a 90 foot podium that basically

serves as the edge of the city read the gap building and the hills plaza to the south and along the embarcadero roadway. behind that, which is also incorporated into the design of the gap building is a height between 200 240 and 289 feet at its tallest point at the gap building and behind that is basically the location of a block one project. which is here, and visible with the pipeline projects and basically they have already been permitted or they basically have the sales force tower at the highest point of the city which demarcates the transit center itself and beyond that you have the towers of the transit center district plans that surround the sales force tower. and then tapering down behind the gap building is the trans-bay redevelopment project area and then to the south of that we have the existing developments on green con hill.

this is what the image of the 400 foot tower looks like as proposed in this plan amendment. basically, we still see the tapering coming down from the sales force tower and from the green con hill and we see that stepping down to the waterfront that happens with the gap building in front of the proposed project here. which is this white tower. here behind this gap building. as well, we see the saddle. the saddle that demarcates what is folsom and separates the downtown mound of san francisco with the residential neighborhood which is green con hill south of folsom. wanted

to show you how we think this height increase will work with the proposed skyline. this is folsom boulevard w and this is a view from full some will of hard to the north on the top and 2 blocks from full some to howard and then on the south is also 2 blocks south of folsom to the bay bridge. to the north you can see that there are higher buildings the higher buildings are 912 foot high sales force tower as the summit there is the peak. and then to the south you can see that one green con building as being the tallest building on green con hill is there is a grade differential of 605 feet given the 10% bonus that is given to that building to the top of the

mechanical equipment there but also 100 feet on top of that is the grade differential so in fact that building compared to where block one is is around 700 feet tall. in comparison given the grade differential. so, if you drew a line from the top of the sales force tower down to the gap building you would see that it 300 feet there is still some room and we could still step up and keep that tapering effect at the block one site. the black one site as you see from the south basically is the war than the infiniti building that exist just across the street from full some street at 400 feet and if you see that line that comes across basically from green con hill to the infiniti building at 400 feet we are still looking at that line. so, i think this slide demonstrates clearly that stepping down and that tapering down to the waterfront that happen still with a 400 foot height of the block one project.

finally, i just wanted to show you what could potentially be a future postcard of san francisco. here is a view from yerba buena island as well as the plan projects and the 400 foot tower and if you look you can see the block one project at 400 feet that is in a line with the city and it allows that saddle that the district plan calls for. here is exactly where the building is with 400 feet. in addition to urban form, we look at the impact of the shadow and the wind. we didn't addendum on the environmental impact report of the trans-bay redevelopment plan for the to cover for

purposes of seqa any differences height differences there might have. the budget that was studied in the original eir was much larger than the project being proposed today. even though the height is higher with the amendment. the budget that was with the eir was around 580 units. 581 exactly units. approximate 30,000 ft.2 of retail. the proposal is for 391 units and around 8 or 9000 ft.2 of retail. as a result, the impact that we are looking at were basically limited to those impacts that those addendum would create and that is based on this height. we focused our look at wind and we found there were no significant impacts or results from this wind increase. we did shadow

impacts. we looked at the shadow areas there are basically 6 parks were publicly accessible open spaces. some parts are yet not build for example the trans-bay park between maine and beale street and the city park on top of the trans bay terminal itself. the analysis took into consideration the type of analysis we do under section 235 of the planning code. certainly the planning department doesn't look at proposed parts but we did a proposed section applying section 235 with that the radical sunlight amount. and that's basically the number of

areas in the park and the impacts of the parks over a year and what we discovered was impacts on parks and open spaces in the year within the shadow of this tower less than 0.5% of the theoretically available annual sunlight on these parks. 0.5% was-- you know is considered it was considered at our commission hearing at our hearing on community investment and infrastructure not to be a significant environmental impact. out if you look at this table that i'm showing you now the additional shading on the part with the open space there one of 6 parks that we looked at. the 1st row is an impact park. that is 0.34% of the 3 erratically available annual sunlight on that part the

>>we have joshua's whiskey the manager of community planning at the planning department to answer any questions you might have with respect for the general plan with these urban designed plans that are surging and we also want to show your community outreach strategy. we have had over 10 community meetings in the neighborhood and in january 2016 the community outreachcommittee voted for approval of what we brought to you today. we did go to the planning commission and also our commission which is the oci i commission to approve these proposals before you and finally, here we are today at the board of

supervisors we will go back to our commission at oci i for them to consider the design of this project and the disposition and development agreement and finally, in summer we will come back to you to approve the property plan in concordance with law all 33433 as shane share with you earlier. if you have any questions we be happy to answer them for you. >>= colleagues are there any questions? supervisor peskin. >>that proposal was dated when? >>july 2014. have there been

any updatesin the case of anrfp? and in case 9 what was the appraised value of that? >>that was the point that i gave in my presentation they are the they are the same about 32,000 feet >> i realize that that contribute to send to the project is $19.2 million but

why did the appraise at half the price of block 9? >>i am not an appraiser but what i can tell you is that primary reason is the unit count. unit 9 had 545 units in total approved for that piece of land of which only 20% were affordable all compared to what we are proposing for block one which is and 901 and and 40% are affordable. >>the land value is the land value based on the highest and best uses. and the fact is that a 400 foot building versus another 400 foot building i don't see how the dirt bow you can be half the price.

>>the higher the density that you can get will land the more the land will be worth. >>in this case if it is 545 units of hundred of those were affordable with the developer come in and that leaves about 450 units at market rate and with block 1, the actual market rate units were 396 last 2 156. i'm trying to figure what the number is but it's considerably less and that's the primary difference in the value. >> >>thank you. >>thank you supervisor

peskin.supervisor kelly >>there has been questions about the 19.2 price compared to the price of the parcels in the neighborhood. maybe you could explain to us the appraisal analysis that was conducted for this transaction. and ultimately the conclusion that this should have been correct and that the price is fair and below market rate. >>supervisor: can you briefly repeat that question i'm sorry.

>>i don't mind a 3rd time the city is not getting fair market value for the parcel. explain to me why. >>one thing i failed to mention one supervisor peskin asked the question is that $19.2 million price also reflects only the oci i portion of that block. which is the 34,000 ft.2. so, that is a no other difference. in the fair market value. to get back to your question can i just >>are you finished. supervisor peskin.

>>when you raise the oci i interest the 2 parcels that we are comparing are virtually the exact same amount of land. i'm not understanding what your understanding about oci eyes portion. 400,062 ft.2 of land at block 1 and in 64,000 ft.2 of block 9 and i didn't understand what that gentleman was saying .. >>supervisor peskin, my name is tiffany bell he i'm the

supervisor for trans bay redevelopment project area. that 19.2 appraised value at the time we entered into exclusive i have negotiations where we set up a price like 6, 7, 8, 9, takes 2+ years to a negotiate sometimes 3 or 4 we do not keep resetting it. because, we do have an obligation for good faith negotiationsthat at least we can answer to an ena to keep to those good faith negotiations. >>supervisor cohen, does that include your question? >>know what my conclusion is specifically about the statement you made to the department of that this is below market value. >>throuugh the chair if you look through the draft 33433 market will port which is a fair use value which the board must consider before any property transfer. the total amount of consideration is 52.2 million. the proportionate share of the oci partial on

trans a block one is 14 million of additional developer subsidy provided to construct the 100% podium building and then an additional 17 million that has lost its value by distributing those units all the way up through the tower. >>what i'm most concerned about is that we are not to make any money on this particular project. >>absolutely is part of the fair market value of valuation. we certainly have a real estate economist who serves on the controllers panel as well. we mr. marston and kelly here as well to answer any questions. >>i have a question on the height increase who should i address that to as well? >>grad asked the question >>how did you arrive to the 426

feet for example. why not 356? why not 336? what is so significant about 446 feet that it relates to the increase of the affordable housing in this project? >>sure, supervisor cohn height increase and section 400 in a sends the 26,000 for the penthouse and then in essence 426 again the primary for the purpose of doing the site for the agency and for oci i is to deliver moderate housing and that what we're doing here is moderate and not affordable housing that is not traditionally built.we have a redevelopment plan to do this. for us, it was a housing

project. mr. compos at our office did a presentation at the analysis of the planning department we were looking at the urban form, the mound, the saddle, and in our view it was appropriate to increase at 100 feet. >>y 100 feet and not 50 feet?@i do not understand i'm not following the economic analysis. if you go 50 feet and gives you 3 more years ago 20 feet to just the me more units. i don't understand why you increased by 100 feet. >>we wanted to maximize the number of units built. certainly there are more units built. those units are in the tower themselves. they're not in the lowrise. we don't want to build any more than we can

in the lowrise podium shorter building. we are looking at maximizing the opportunity to deliver more affordable units in that tower to keep up with urban design and form and cognizant of shadow but not just one built parts that are publicly accessible open space but also future parks as well. so a balancing of those interest to maximize affordable housing, minimize parks and in good keeping with urban form. >>what would've happened if you would've come down 50 feet? how many units would've been lost at all? we talked earlier about additional shadow and that the projects causing? >>we do not undertake a

sensitivity analysis of stepping up when we started with what should we strive for to maximize moderate income units and deliver those units as fast as possible. certainly, when a proportionate share instead of 156 affordable units and 391 total units you would have less. >>how much less? of your time back to last that's an insignificant number but if you talked about 30 laugh that is a significant number but you will never know because you didn't study it. >>we are trying to put as many units as possible. there are units for families and units for teachers. they are a mix. they are an appropriate mix. there's a proximally a 2+ units on the project if the complicated undertaking to develop a tower that size. at this point i cannot exactly say from a sensitivity analysis how many less because we would've look at all factors of the project and what that would impact. >>my last question again is for the project sponsor and deals with community engagement. i

heard there was not enough community engagement. maybe, you could have someone discuss this aspect of the project and how it was conducted and who did it and how many meetings >>i woulld like to ask carl shannon with titian inspired to come up >>good afternoon. it's good to be here please excuse the informal footwear. i had surgery last week. we had multiple outreach meetings with formally with oci i and we had to community outreach meetings early in the process >>let me write this down. you had to widely advertised well before the schedule they had

with oci i we had most of the residents concerned here in infinity we had to specific meetings specifically at the infinity in addition to the 2 broader meetings and then we had the whole series that was part of the presentation with oci i and that is another 5-6 meetings. we had extensive outreach and i know that most people all who will stand up an object on a personal basis here. this is been a long, ongoing conversation. partly in response to your early questions. the infinity and luminosity's were set at 400 feet. the logic and coming to 400 feet was to make them the same as those heights which were set afterthe trans-bay plan so that is part of your the answer to your earlier question >>thank you i appreciate the answer. mdm. pres., i'm done

>>representative weiner >>so the statistics you gave earlier that 40% of that one block at 40% >>yes representative wiener that is on one block. all of trans bay blocks are providing a portion of the necessity in order to achieve it. >>it is $19.2 million approximately? >>yes. initially it was oci i taxpayer in public money. yes, we use taxpayer dollars back in 03 or 4 to require the parking

lot from the state. >>initially oci i and the public were going to make a cash payment to the developer in order to increase the affordability to 40% but it was restructured and instead of paying cash the public is now instead of giving the lead at a valuation of $19.2 million to the developers so the developer can use that to increase the affordability percentage to 40%. >>oci i is contributing the land yes in order to make that work. >>i am not criticizing the idea of having the developer put in the portion of the value necessary for them to receive whatever the percentage of

affordability and i taxpayer in san francisco also putting in money for value to increase affordability. we shall have skin in the game when it comes to increasing affordability. but, i think it is important to really be clear about that. when this project, when we really start to hear about it there was an implication that the developer was brought out to the woodshed and forced to go out to 40% when actually the taxpayers of san francisco's were putting in almost $20 million in order to get it up to the 40%. it is not just coming out of the developers value. you do not have to comment on that. i know that's a loaded statement. but i think that it's really important that the project was announced as a 40% project where the developer was announced that they were doing 40% but we know there was a significant substance he that loud that that happened so i

appreciate it. >>thank you supervisor wiener. supervisor kim. >>just because supervisor wiener keeps drilling on this project i don't think anybody's claiming that the developer claimed to say 40% we have always been able to achieve higher levels of affordability throughout san francisco because taxpayers wanted us to invest public dollars to build affordable housing. this is what the sport of supervisors thought when the state decided to establish redevelopment as we knew this was an important tool and getting to this unavailability that being said we were able to tional subsidies to achieve 40% we could've easily gotten 100 foot

pipee bomb and said we were getting more housing in general and not asked if we have any additional affordable housing. in fact, i think there were times when this board has in developments have conferred additional value onto land for developers or additional density or additional height and we just like the developer make all of it market rate housing. so, not taking any units away for them to achieve greater revenue on that parcel even if the city comes in some of those units need to be more affordable for middle income or working-class residents. those units have been essentially taken out of the development from the developers to generate revenue that they can make it market rate. so, we could've had 2 deals before us. we could've had a 400 foot development come before the board without any additional affordable without anything that been committed and frankly

we spent months negotiating to get to 40%. the developer didn't just walk in and say yeah, i want to do 40% less you pay for some of it. that wasn't how it happened. in fact it never happens that way. it was a very tough negotiation and even when the public put in some skin in the game the developer doesn't just roll over and say this is what i

>>i was just wondering mr. shannon out of idle curiosity you said the opponents of the project were people that you knew so presumably people that we sold the units to because this building was built not to longer. did they have any idea that tishman and oci i would seek a zoning from i should say 200 or 400 i should've said 300 to 400 but did they know that the time? >>sure. they knew after the trans bay heights were set. at the time, we gain construction in 2005 and units in 2006 and

sold the last unit in 2011. it wasn't until 2013 we got control of the private parcel several other developers have tried so the curious people who are owners at the infinity who did their homework at the time would have had the height across the 300 feet. there was no sales force tower there was no misted mission there were none of the other things that are trans bay upgrades that were really a collaborative effort of working with oci i and doing the best of what we thought were public and private partnership to be in line with the other projects 688

leadership of kim who was able to purchase a building through the land trust and stabilization money for people with families not to lead our community.to coexist in the south where i am born and raised is to build relationships with developers to help us build at a high, affordable rate.our

organization has been serving the city for over 22 years with violence prevention and we have 240 guns off the streets with this gun buyback and were doing one saturday on april 16. there is actually some sponsors that are helping us out. they also had built us and to acquire a building and to stabilize our center. stability is important to us when we are living the south of market and we are building relationships not walls. >>[timer dings]

>>thank you. next speaker please >>times are good right now there's a lot of construction going on and this does not mean that our residents and workers here are now we are seeing 10 to 20% of our members even in times like this having to leave the city and move away even though we are those who stayed here and grow. were born and raised here. not only will labor be involved in the project but our local contract will -- contractors will be

involved too. we have 100% union jobs across the board were in full support of the height increase. thank you. >>thank you. next speaker please. >>good afternoon my name is paul weber and i'm not representing anybody but myself today. i'm listening to the discussion of the value of the property and some call it subsidy and that is sort of key to the whole project. it seems to be a debate among many people about the adequacy or the value specified. why doesn't the board commission its own appraisal you have some time based on another suggestion i'll be making and let that appraisal come back to you and let the appraisal show value at 300 x feet versus 400

x feet we can have a appraisal done like that and you all would be satisfied that you are getting fair market value for the property instead of debating it for this long. basing this on an appraisal that's now 2 years old simply can't be relied upon. secondly is my understanding that people that were opposed to the proproject thought that they would have access to that and i it is my understanding

that this will not be ready until july and i think that the final consideration should be put off until a your final consideration and bu had a chance to review this report. thank you. >>leopard timer dings] >>thank you. next speaker please ject >>it will provide good union jobs for members and residents of san francisco. the project will provide affordable housing. tinsman has been a good project and labor we look forward to working with them on this project. i think you for this time. >>thank you. next speaker please. >>good afternoon my name is tom o'connor i am here with the san francisco firefighters department. i'm here to speak on the general plan amendment.

this 7 amendment will lead to more housing and more that the below market rate which we clearly need in our city today. it will give more opportunity for members to live in san francisco. tinsman has been very helpful in insisting 1st rate responsible's in getting affordable housing. when we talk about firefighters and nurses and teachers and paramedics live in the city people want to stress that it's great in case it's the big one. but we think the big one is that little emergency like when your mom breaks her hip or a child is choking or someone is creepy down the block and you want to go get your local policeman that is down the street and have them check it out for you. we look forward to working with them in the

future >>thank you next speaker please >>my name is tony rodriguez and i am a san francisco native resident. we asked that you approve the project. it past because of the 40% availability it will be 156 unit plus the 200 market rate units and both groups are much-needed in san francisco. it would also be nice to see some of the work as a buildings project to be able to live in them. that would also be made possible because the developer has also shown that they built their projects with contractors that pay on the advantage of projects they built years ago. the last thing a is i just want to conclude that supervisor kim i

do negotiations with my unit and nothing just happens. you can't just say at this just happens you can just say this is going to be a project at 40% hundred and 56 unit. it happens because of negotiations. thank you. >>thank you. next speaker please. >>good afternoon supervisors my name is mike otero. i would like to thank supervisor mickey for honoring the holy sister day home for honoring her for her service to our city. this is unusual climate to characterize these discussions but at the board of supervisors we would not find this apart of these wars. had the trans bay

district has one in the subject a broad consensus on this board and yet, i suppose it was inevitable that neighbors would have concerned about views from the windows. the recently obtained views from their windows would raise steric issues an attempt to preserve those views. i think that's exactly i wish understand the issues being raised by the neighbors. those you should not be the concern of this board they should never be the concern of this board. instead, i think we should look at the fact that they have been presented to you that the increased height does allow greater portions of affordability in this project and we ask you to support this project. tinsman and squire have been a wonderful supporter in san francisco and they were good with us. so thank you for allowing me to speak. >>thank you. next speaker please >>good afternoon i am at yemen of the trans bay supervisors committee. we supported the

plan amendments with an increase in height and we did so noting several points. 1st the increased height will add a total of 73 units and 44 below market rate affordable units. 2nd the effect on shadows in green can't park is to minimus the higher buildings fit in with the surrounding neighborhood. there many taller buildings with 4 to 500 feet and above 1 nearby blocks. when the original trans-ba redevelopment plan was developed thaty done even the 300 foot height seemed bold for the site with a subsequent development what seemed bold then seems modest now. next point. the additional units strengthened the transient

orienting character of the project. finally, the additional height enhances the elegant design that the building that we have from game studio. i as the cac urge you to approve the plan amendment and the height increase thank you. >>thank you. next speaker please. >>hello my name is james orzo i'm a food service worker in the development near the high rise and i am here in support of this ordinance and anything that can be done to increase affordable housing in this neighborhood would be much need to cut down on the necessary time and money and waste of expenditures by everybody commuting back and forth work for the type of workers that work in my industry. thank you.

>>thank you. next speaker please. >>hello supervisors my name is dave-i also work at the high dive restaurant. it would also be nice to see these people be part of this community. i'm for this amendment and i urge you to approve this please >>thank you, next speaker please >>i'm in favor of the hundred foot increase for the below market value. >>good afternoon my name is lauren post i am vice chair of the trans bay advisory committee and i am boardd of

directors in the community benefit district i want to assure you supervisor cohn it was a expensive public process in the committee and i myself did attend one of those community meetings and it was very well attended maybe 100 people and i understand that the oci staff at the other community meeting was equally well attended. one thing that hasn't been emphasized is what this building will specifically due to the skyline and how beautiful it will be it will be a marquee building on the skyland i'm looking forward to viewing it out the windows of my home when it goes up because unfortunately i won't be able to because my building will be blocked by building under construction far higher than this one but that is okay because i live in a high right district and would be disingenuous of me to complain about proving if i live in a high-rise. this is a vertical

neighborhood. it is san francisco's most vertical neighborhood and the only way to really get more housing in the city of course is to go vertical. we were not going to have any single-family homes. i would urge you to support the increase to 40% of availability and for something else it might seem boring but >>[timer dings] >>i know that sounds boring but ho a affordability is important. please support the height increase. thank you. >>thank you next speaker please. >>hello i am in favor of the development of 1400 mission a

few months ago. they are also diverse. they represent people that are photographers technicians architects they are diverse in age and family size and i have met neighbors from mexico in vietnam and greece and prices in san francisco that are through the roof people in middle-class jobs can't afford to live here but now being able to afford housing in san francisco will be able to attribute more to the city that i love i have more time to volunteer at a museum as well as the ymca while we support the community school. i also can walk which is really overcrowded in these bay. san francisco is an desperate need for affordable housing. this is a wonderful

solution to bringing diverse people and service workers and entrepreneurs to the city so please approve it. >>thank you. next speaker please >> >>my name is david-- my wife and i had a chance to move to one of the below market rate developments the previous speaker already covered all of the logistics and the national analysis and all that stuff for sure there must be some issues but i believe they are all manageable and when we're talking about families we must look beyond the numbers. is 44 more affordable housing units. that means 44 more families that have the chance to live in

the city and grew up with their kids here and make san francisco their home. thank you so much. >>thank you. speaker please. >>good afternoon everyone my name is angie do amongst i'm 40 years of age in a single mother of 2 harrison keira 3 years ago i ended my 14 year marriage it wasn't working out. the fastest way to get out of it was to move with my 80-year-old grandmother in a studio in on joan our neighborhood is full of life in spite of people's miss misconception family that are thriving here i came here in 1995 before my son was born. 3 years ago i came back to the tenderloin and fell in love with it. my kids are very involved in the community i knew i had to do something. i heard about the ssmoh. i

walked into the community center and they walked me through the process and they they help me the application. if it wasn't for them i would probably be lost. and if it wasn't for the affordable housing program i would've been moved out of the city somewhere where my salary can afford which is about 2 hours east today i stand before you as a living testament of this program and i'm able to get my kids in the community that they're willing to get involved in and take them to the school and 100 feet additional is probably it probably doesn't mean anything to you but it is 44 lives that are going to be change. thank you. >>thank you. next speaker

please. >>i have been in san francisco since 2007 and i just moved to one of these below the market apartments. it was the only racket stay in the city. and has to be wonderful it is. this building is not only beautiful outside but it's gonna make it beautiful on the inside for the people that are going to move there. i don't have to say that we are going to have a catastrophe with housing. we need more of any kind of construction and is not because i'm in construction but is difficult to find anything. thank you. >>thank you next speaker please.

>>good afternoon, supervisors and ladies and gentlemen. i very much thank you for the city and supervisors because i got a below market rate unit and the others are supporting this and i will let you know that 300 feet is already approved i think 40% is doable for affordable i think we need to support that because most families came in the city and they spend in the city. it is actually san francisco is more than the city. right now, i was talking to someone and in the past 2 years 60,000 families moved out of san francisco and right now there's more dogs and families. i think affordable housing will keep more people here. i think we need to support this particular city more and i

think that there's more people here and out in the city will spend more in the city. thank you. >>thank you next speaker please >>i had the honor of giving keys of previous speakers today. it definitely makes my day when i'm able to do that. i'd also like to read a letter from a homeowner that is not able to be here today as a san francisco resident who greatly benefited from the bmr home program i would like to emphasize the importance of affordable housing for fostering continuing diversity and community and our city. affordable housing allows people to have a place that people can call their own and grow within their means. this eliminates any daily stressors so that we can focus on being productive members in society. we are the teachers, policemen,

researchers, and nonprofit workers of the city. affordable housing allows us to flourish here in our professions and our personal lives. their boundless benefits to the city is a hole. i regrettably cannot speak in person at the board of supervisors meeting but i do offer my support for the block 1 project. i'm in the favor of the height increase in adding the additional 100 feet. this will add more affordable housing and 44 units and 40% designated affordable housing to san francisco. the mayor's office of housing had great strides in addressing this in san francisco. thank you for that. this would be part of this incremental push towards the right direction. >>thank you for your time i hope this comes to fruition. thank you for your time. >>thank you. next speaker please >>good afternoon my name is

monica wilson i am the program director of c we a baby-based program created to divide provide internship opportunities for young adults for construction development and engagement. by way of background i wanted to let you know that for the last 18 months i have been working with tinsman and squire on their small business enterprise program including 2 components professional service procurement and the sce training program. in both instances not only did they design and implement these programs successfully but the results far exceed the program requirements and goals with powerful, economic impacts for

san francisco lb's for internships over the summer. this program is designed for grassroots and community-based outreach. and this will incorporate innovative strategies to maximize participation opportunities. what does this deliver? the impacts are both measurable and strong? on the sbe professional service they exceeded the program requirement of 15% and delivered almost 90. they had strong participation in women owned businesses and seniors and lb gt programs. they have ultimately 8 internship divisions to allow the design team to create a trans bay

experience for the adults >>[timer dings >> thank you. next speaker please. >> >>[indecipherable]

>>[timer dings] >>[timer dings] >>thank you speaker please good afternoon my name is brand demand. i have lived here it in 20 years. i am here because i participated along with a lot of other people in the drafting and the preparation of the original trans-bay redevelopment plan. that plan was a result of a great deal of time and effort by a number of people and they came up with a plan that was integrated and

would be beneficial to the neighborhood. i do not believe that any thing has been presented to you today that could be justified at this point of changing that plan. i am here to urge you to not proceed with the proposed amendments until such time as there has been a supplemental eir made available to the public so the public has the opportunity to review and comment upon that supplemental eir. the original eir goes back to 2004. 12 years ago. as we all know there's been a great number of changes in the neighborhood since that time.

>>[timer dings] >> intel the public is equated with what the finances are and have an opportunity to review those figures the board should notmove forward with this. thank you. >>thank you. next speaker please >>this is a wonderful opportunity for members. not only to work but also to live in the units they are built in downtown san francisco. tinsman has been a great person work with so far we look forward to working with them on this

contain project. that is about it. working together there are some changes that we need to do and some benefits but but i ask that you support this. thank you. >>thank you. next speaker please. >>good afternoon pres. and supervisors i represent over 3200 carpenters here in san francisco. every day the carpenters are fighting for housing. lately that seems like we have evened up the ante. what this project does is provide homes for 73 more families and 44 those families will be below market rateit

also provides jobs for our carpenters and for our apprentices and afuture. we urge you to support this job we are a great friend of 22 and we urge your support. thank you. thank you next speaker please. >>good afternoon my name is annie campbell i'm a representative that she workers 114. 29 has been a wonderful all partner with our union. as adrian said the height increase that this plan amendment will what it means is more middle income housing housing like supervisor kim said like

teachers and firefighters and like union construction workers are people that i represent. you can hear the speaker saying that that's a great thing. i read something today that union construction jobs are powerful anti-displacement tools that allow working-class blue-collar families to continue to live and work here and san francisco. we ask for your approval on this issue. thank you. >>good afternoon next speaker. >>hello my name is harrison i'm your average working student. i felt like you needed a young voice in this so i actually spoke at a supervisors meeting last year when you guys were negotiating prop i. the city

officials can develop a plan that will if city officials can demonstrate a plan to house families like mine average working class people than i support 100 additional feet. thank you. >>thank you, next speaker please. >>hi my name is can i live in the neighborhood i've lived in san francisco about 10 years now. my big issue with the height increases the cost of the land. i think it's very disingenuous to call this a big affordable housing when because the reality of the situation is that taxpayers are paying for a

large portion of it and this is the closest block to the waterfront of all the parcels that are available and yet it is being sold the least amount of money. how does that make any sense. all you have to do is look at google earth and look at the views of those units that are going to be there and they are going to try to sell for at least 3000 and 4000 a foot. just one unit alone could easily pay for the stupid land. so, i feel like it's not a very good deal for the city. my other issue is just around the height increases i feel like it sets the wrong precedents it just kind of says that the city is for sale and all you have to do is based the money and you can lease. and there's block to unblock for a more and asked the exact same thing but will be up to say block one got it. i feel like that is just a bad precedents per se. i also just want to point out that i did

email oci i about this specific parcel and i just ask them if they could email me [inaudible] and they said no would not be possible. is one to point that out. thank you very much. >>thank you very much. next speaker please. >>good afternoon. my name is blake einstein i'll do not make 6 figures a year but i do hope to one day own a home in san francisco. what is the stop the other trans bay developments from taking the same special treatment. i have heard an argument that a precedents is already been set. that argument is set to be these proposed buildings are not part of the transit center district plan. they do not

have that significant of the impact on look and feel of our city. there has been no other building since the plans adoption in 2012 rather that has received this zoning and this will be a benchmark for all future trans bay developments. this could leave the door open for future projects like those on block to her 12 to get height increases. those are housing issues. it is one that i feel every day and it may last another 5 to 10 years but this trans bay buildings may be here in another 5 to 10 years or 20 years or i know we need affordable housing but we can't throw away careful city plans for something that will barely make a dent in the housing problem. i qualify from affordable housing i personally stand to benefit from these units but i look at what is proposed it does not make sense. it is supposed to be cheaper

than the downtown mound and it 400 feet this will lock when will be the tallest building on spear street the argument of this building directly on the waterfront is irrelevant. it's 200 feet taller than the building adjacent to it. >>[timer dings] >>thank you. next speaker please. know, i'm sorry to give the same amount of time to everyone you consummate your statement. next speaker please >>i am a neighbor of this

outreach number 1 i think on february 13 or the senior project manager for cii had an email that said no, you cannot go above 3 and her feet. it is the law. next trans bay development guidelines say that no variation should be given to the maximum height or regulation. 3 in her feet is the maximum but that's the design plan. next, the general design plan calls for tapering down the buildings. despite oci i'm sorry give me a break at the back of the full anybody. developers are not providing 40%. developers not providing the city 20% 19.2 million that land is worth a lot more about $50 million which is really a giveaway of city land that we should earn. the board of supervisors approved the sale of block 9 for a price of

almost $43 million. again there is something going on there. finally, the environmental impact report that you're supposed to get there isn't one. based on data more than 12 years old and that neighborhood is changed completely. now, is residential. before, it was warehouses and light industrial system. is very very different. finally, i asked oci i for an economic study and they finally said that they do not have an economic study. >>[timer dings] >>next speaker please >>there is no doubt that the additional hundred and 26 feet height increase will alter a number of important san

francisco precedents and environmental issues that until now been vigorously protected by thought for visionaries responsible for a safe future. you know that concern about not protest allowing building height decay shatters on our citizens. ensuring that an accurate independently prepared eir provides insurances that the proposed building at its full height and mass does not induce and infrastructure problems

>>1st i want to point out that the provider is not providing the additional affordable housing for the height increase. there required by law to provide 35% of affordable housing whether he goes to 300 feet or 400 feet. the additional 5% of affordable housing units that he is providing in order to get the additional 126 feet height increase is not a below market value. 30 units-- of families your earning 120 units of 101

earned $20,000 your income.in addition, we still need to cover our $108 a month in ho 8 dues. theere are a lot of people in the city who will not be able to afford these housing units, but, policeman teachers and certainly childcare workers who are now earning approximately $77,000 a year. we have learned today that the city has drafted an economic study called the 33433 report. i'm surprised they would've come this far without a previous report. i urge you to postpone or not agree to allow this developer--

>>[timer dings] >>had no supervisors my name is jan chang i asked that you allow this zone to increase for the several reasons. this will set a precedent for other developers this will have major impacts on the local residential businesses. the e. bay commuters dr. through this area to get to the bay bridge. that area is highly packed with the bars. many people go to the area for happy hours and dinner. the nearby stadium host events all the time. it

is nearly impossible to get home or in and out of there by car. during traffic hours on a daily basis. this can be a problem situation if there is a medical or fire emergency. the height increase will also cast a shadow in a nearby cart. our city is known for the lack of sunshine. knowing how important the sun line is for a well being we should not have her buildings to block the sunlight are nearby parks. the people of san francisco voted down the 8 washington park projects just a couple years ago. the city's legacy live in fear that we will not want the

cities to live-- >>thank you your time is up thank you thank you. next speaker please. >>hello laura clark, with the oss. i asked you to support this height increase. as was

pointed out there is a vibrant walkable community in this area already ready to receive people that are happy to jump on transportation and use the city the way that is meant to be lived in. walking around the neighborhoods and enjoying their communities. the only way were going to get to a more affordable san francisco is with these type of heights increases in density increases and we need to realize that no, spot zoning is not something you want to embrace and in order to fix this problem we need to embrace density and height throughout the city. we cannot point the finger at this community and the community and say, you know somebody else has to build housing over there. we need to hear when you everywhere. this is exactly the kind of project that i beg you guys to support. thank you so much. >>thank you. next speaker please. >>tom gilberty. we need to build density they need to be the key catchwords. yet, the same time how many people that are working in san francisco can afford above $80,000 or $100,000 gal said and also the condo fees. the real community of san francisco includes

teachers nurses if you're living single you can afford those things we do not need to have the density built and built until there is a big block. especially on our views and especially on our market there are and especially on our global enterprise. how are we going to protect at property and the flatland that's already flooding a little bit now. will the city be liable we all know that there is global warming we didn't think it was going to be 10 feet high you to take care of us. you planned it, you're afforded it, you let us have it. market rate housing is in the stratosphere of the real estate investment world now. we are building basically units now for market real estate

developers around the world to sell there is going to be 156 units below affordable market. only 40 of them are going to be below-market. in south beach marina the only people where i live that really make the neighborhood below market rate units that have been there as long-term as possible. i don't agree with going up higher on not in fact i agree with going. i like a tier to assess especially along embarcadero . any other public comment? public comment is closed is hearing has been closed we will resubmit as the board of

supervisors. >>thank you representative i think this will be the best we could do with the trans bay plan were we've committed 35% of affordable housing i want to thank john burton for his leadership it certainly helps in ensuring keeping my office accountable and making sure we are fighting for every unit that we can get and i do want to also recognize and think the leadership at oci i they do a really tremendous job around i'm looking at the value of what we're building and making sure that the city is getting the best deal and tiffany bohee

has worked at my office on negotiating several deals with the trans bay development area plan and am always incredibly impressed by the immense amount of work in detail and analysis that goes into every project and i believe that this department really cares about maximizing affordability in every single development. it was what this office to see achieved landmarks 1 in fremont f8 off-site with regular city policy or paid a little under $5 million thanks for the advocacy the oci i did along with their analysis along with the mayors they got close to $15 million on the off-site fee with 11 units that could be built off-site. i think this is just another example of a great deal that has been negotiated and i do also want to recognize trish m's for working on our goals and coming

back to the city and make this a true example of a middle income direct project. again, we know were not building enough middle income housing in the city. in fact, that is where we are the lowest in terms of meeting our goals. these are the very families and households that are getting pushed out. we've heard it over and over in public comment these are students are artists or construction workers are nurses or teachers or police officers. we want them to live where they work and not commute hours to come in. we know our public transit system is overloaded as well. colleagues , i think the additional density and height is an aesthetic change for an exemplary diverse homeownership project and i just asked for your support. >>thank you supervisor kim. seeing no other names on the roster i want to just touch on to issues that came up not only during public comment butin conversation amongst my

colleagues of 12buying the

application database that is an effort they been working on really really hard on. those who have areas to improve our seniors and have online access again, it's really a matter of

connecting for the opportunity that would arise for the ownership opportunities on the site and we are committed to doing that we're connecting to the opportunities i am >>you don't live in a certain proximity of those projects you will not qualify for those projects what i'm trying got here is how do we include the workforce in this agreement. how include workforce in this agreement? you will have to give some thought to resources and fair housing to really connect truly

ready and have the opportunity to have all the services available for them. i think what i'm getting at here will we talk about the fair housing laws on higher mai units and are subsidized by private dollars. why would those units if there housing laws in the same way in terms of how you have to perform your system. it doesn't make any sense. why would those not being a preference for higher ami units

for this project. that possibly happen? >>for those hundred and 56 middle income homes to the extent that they have other preferences though certainly could help but i do think that connecting people with opportunity we could also as part of understanding market place who is working and we can currently undertake county surveys and understand the existing markers in the

neighborhood and through the construction process part of the affirmative marketing and partnering with the developers and the consultants to make sure that we have the data for those individuals to connect with these opportunities that they can take advantage of the worker preference. >>thank you. nothing is more important to me that when we build affordable housing that more workers actually qualify for this affordable housing mutombo every time we ask that individuals have a real shot at affordable housing i appreciate that and one other issue that i want to bring out as this

happens every time of future developments as well. takes a lot of individuals to qualify. above them are frustrating and low income individuals i could disqualify with credit issues. there will be a lot of programs to get us ready for this opportunity beware we figure out a way to make payment and make adjustments and i just want to put that out here to do that is an issue. we are about a different approach your of this particular project about the hoa as compared to other

affordable housing and other projects were the hoa's are the same. as what is difficult sometimes for people to qualify for these units. you want to know is that happening as relates to the hoa. >>in terms of pricing the initial sales pricing will take into account the mortgage,taxes, insurance and the hla pricing. however, what happens is the sales price is lowered so, for example that 80% ami unit for a

two-person household that pricing can be adjusted. and part of our staff presentation. that we are looking at innovative structure for 2 separate injuries all that be in my 40% as well as a separate market rate hr and those 2 separate injuries roll up to a come back >>i appreciate that. these are the 2 challenges with housing

that i am supporting this for. thank you mrs. bohee. >>thank you mme. pres. >> >>when you have the opportunity to actually support something is a great feeling and actually he being a place where i feel that it is a good project to fill this is an example where height can be used to advance that possibility a think it's good to have the possibility of men and women who are building something to actually be able to live in what they are building. but, i also know that it does not happen easily. i want to just acknowledge the work of supervisor kim in the office. i know a lot of time

and energy goes into this to thank you for delivering is support today. thank you. i too have been very impressed with the level of detailall the time and energy goes into the work that you doi'm very appreciative of that. i know it's not easy to get a project to this point. so, thank you. >>thank you. supervisor kim. >>it would be great if the mayor's office of housing would give us a breakdown on some of our more recent housing projects and we get