>> excuse me. can you please identify yourself. >> my name is fran weld, i'm senior vice president of development for the giants delighted to be with you all today. thank you for having me. the foundation of our planning process has been rooted in public space and creating 8 acres of parks and open space. this network will connect a neighborhood to the waterfront. china basin park by you see here will benefit the entire east side of the city and be a central gathering place for all of san francisco to come enjoy the waterfront. mission rock square will be a vibrant urban center park with buildings fronting the park. so as to create a safe and walkable pedestrian and neighborhood experience. with its small scale walkable blocks, wide sidewalks, and network of bicycle paths, mission rock is designed to be a center for neighborhood serving retail, which will support not

only the community of south beach and mission bay, but also new residents on site. the retail within the neighborhood will be small shops and affordable spaces and we have worked hard with neighbors who have lived around the site for many years to identify the needs that this neighborhood would like to see, including child care, coffee shops, small scale markets, production space, and other neighborhood serving uses. as with our comprehensive approach to the retail planning, we have also taken a holistic approach to addressing some of what we see as a city's most pressing needs here at mission rock. 40% of the homes will be affordable to low, moderate, and middle income families, including two and three bedroom units. 2 4 apartments will be permanently get aside for youths transitioning out of the foster care system, a model for integration into our city's community. together with many city

agencies, we have also established an extraordinary program for environmental sustainability, including site wide energy and water systems and a 20% reduction in single use automobile trips. the site will be raised to accommodate up to 66 inches of sea level rise which the highest projection today for the year 2100. in addition, will pay special taxes into a port wide program for shoreline protection and stablization. $40 million will go towards transportation investments for the surrounding area. finally, we are proud of our commitments to the local economic investment with 30% local hire, 20% lbe and hiring throughout. we're also generating $1 million to build city build capacity, half of which will go towards community organizations. mission rock will create jobs for local residents and opportunities for san francisco

businesses all while delivering these important public benefits to the city as a whole. before i turn if over to mark who'll touch on the ocii elements of the approval before you today, i would like to acknowledge and thank our incredible team. over the last decade, hundreds of dedicated and talented individuals have committed their time and energies to shaping the vision that you see before you today. so a giant thank you to all the mission rockers who have made this possible. with that, on to mark. >> good afternoon, president breed, supervisors. project manager for mission bay. the item before you today is an amendment to the mission bay south very development plan. we are amending the plan to remove an 18-foot strip of open space that is within the southern edge of seawall lot

337. this 3/10 of an acre parcel is p20. it is a map of mission bay south and the thin red line is where p20 is. here's a zoomed up like. p20 is a port owned parcel. back in 1988, when with the plan was originally designed, the intent of p20 was to be a buffer between mission bay development and the ports then industrial uses on lot 337. now that we have this great project going there, we no longer find the need for a buffer. so we are proposing this amendment. back in september 14th, 2017, it was presented to the mission bay advisory committed. they recommended plan amendment for approval and adoption by the board of supervisors. on october 17th, 2017, the

commission on community investment and infrastructure adopted resolution 402017 approving the amendment. on october 17th, the commission adopted resolution 39201 7 which was approving the report to the board. oci, asks the board for consideration of this plan amendment. if there's any questions, i would be happy to answer them. >> thank you so much. so seeing no questions at this time, madam president would ask to open up for public comment on this hearing. >> okay. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this hearing? public comment is now open. >> just to be specific, we are having a hearing on mission rock, the project. if you would like to speak on the project, that is the next hearing. this is specifically on the

amendment to the mission bay south redevelopment plan. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is denise mccarthy, and i am a former port commissioner. i operated a cbo in san francisco for many years, and i'm currently cochair of the giants community center. excuse me. community fund. i had a long history with the port in the past including waterfront planning issues as well as being on the commission when key developments such as the ferry building and the giants ballpark were developed. today, the port has chosen the

giants as a partner on the mission rock project. it envisions really something that we put together in the very early stages of waterfront planning. so i encourage you all to support the project. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> tom gilbert. i'm a neighborhood at south beach marina apartments. thank you. i'm going to go outside the line here because i believe this is -- for this little strip, this amendment. i said before that i was againsn probably in the city against the giant probably executive mostly because there's 900 units of

market rate rentals, and a market rate rental is a cavity in the tooth of a healthy community. i said that about south beach marina. we need seniors, but seniors can't stay if they get a $600 rent increase. we have families that they want to have a child or two, and they can do that, but at market rate rents, you cannot. below market rate there's 40%. i have to compliment the giants on doing that and raising it and doing all the nice things they are doing. but we have seniors that need places to get into from our city, and we cannot build it. we built a 90-unit, 9-story building on cesar chavez for seniors, and the response was we

need 900 more. so we don't expect the giants and all the other big developments on the eastern block that are building bold new neighborhoods to observe all of it. they can start helping by taking what's on the ground in reality where we need transitioning housing. i'm grad they're doing that for the -- glad they're doing that for the graduated foster kids, but we need help for the kids coming out of -- what do they call that when you're coming off the streets. thank you. we need bigger help here. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> when i hear this, i get scared. you ask yourselves why i get scared. i used to live in mission rock with the --

>> pardon me. this is the mission bay. the mission rock is next. are there any members of the public who would like to speak to this specific item? public comment is now closed. this hearing has been held and is now filed. we will reconvene as the board of supervisors. >> thank you. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you, madam president. i would like to move item 33 -- sorry -- >> we can take item 33. oh, the house has changed. madam clerk on item 33, please call the roll. [ roll call ]

>> there are nine aye. it passes unanimously. please call 34 through 36. >> comprise the board of supervisors sitting as a committee as a whole. these items were scheduled and approved on november 30th and continued from january 23rd, 2018 for a public hearing to consider establishing project area i and project area i-1 through i-13 there in of infrastructure financing district number two and ordinance establishing project area i and sub project areas i-1

through i-13 of infrastructure financing district number 2 and to affirm the planning department's finding. item 35 is the ordinance to establish the project area i and to affirm the planning department's determination and make the appropriate findings and item 36, the resolution to approve issuance of bonds in an amount not to exceed approximately $1.3 million for the project area i. also known as mission rock and sub project areas i-1 through i-13 of the city and county of san francisco's infrastructure financing district number 2 to approve the indenture of trust and pledge agreement and other matters in connection therewith. >> we're sitting as a committee as a whole to discuss the project area 1 mission rock and the sub project area l-1. >> i-1. >> thank you. i-1 through i-13 infrastructure

financing discussion. let's open up this hearing. i will turn it over to supervisor kim. >> thank you, president breed. in the ten years that we have often engaged on the development of this project, the giants have brought home 3 championships, and we want to thank our team for making our city proud, but i really do view this as the fourth unofficial championship where the giants are truly bringing home an unpresident dented project. they are the first project sponsor ever to commit to 40% affordable and low income housing. what's distinct about this project is their commitment to middle encloses housing, something we haven't done to a great extent before. what i also appreciate about this project is that we are covering such a wide range of household incomes. normally, in many of our affordable housing projects, we will build for one type of income, whether it's working

class or middle class housing. this will cover a broad range from ballpark workers to nurses and teachers. it was involved through a very -- i would say, a sophisticated tightrope dance that took place in negotiations over several weeks and over one very long night at the giants office where we were able to put something together that we all felt truly proud of and that would be able to welcome and keep many of our families and residents here in san francisco. this is one of our largest surplus properties owned publicly by the city and county. for me in particular, it was important that we as a city also achieve a high rate of affordable housing on this project as well since we're building on public land, we should absolutely be building them for our city as well. and this project not only includes high levels of

affordable and i had inle income housing -- middle income housing. it includes a park and a commitment to ensure we have retail, manufacturing, and pdr that will create jobs but also serve the needs of our residents and i know i've talked about this several times at different hearings, add board committees. many of our residents are frustrated that the mission bay neighborhood, while beautiful and new, often doesn't have the types of stores, restaurants, amenities that they see in other san francisco neighborhoods. so we really appreciate the years of outreach the giants have been engaged in working with our mission bay residents to ensure that we are building a neighborhood that works for our residents and also helping to complete this completely new transformed neighborhood in san francisco. i also want to thank the project sponsors for implementing a robust workforce commitment program to encourage local

business participation and partnering with groups like sf and including a local higher participation level of 30%. for the vertical developers, meaning those that are going to be building up the projects, not the infrastructure, will also contribute $1 million to office of economic and workforce development to ensure parcel by parcel installments to support our community based organizations. finally, i also want to acknowledge the project sponsor over the last couple months, in committing to us that they would be maximizing residential development on the site. 40% is great. but we want to make sure it's 40% of as many housing units as possible, and in the original proposal, the residential parcels had a flex option of hotel. through negotiations and discussions, the giants have agreed to move that hotel flex option off the residential parcel and move them to the commercial parcels where they will be building office and other types of spaces. so this just maximizes

residential. as we move forward, because this project will happen in four phases because it's a large project, we also hope that over the coming years that we'll be able to work with the port and the giants to ensure that the final phase, which is flex for commercial or residential builds as much residential housing as possible. we have 'huge crisis here not just in san francisco but throughout our region. we need to make sure we're not just building faces for more jobs but housing for our existing residents and new residents as well. i just wanted to take a moment to thank a number of people that helped bring this decade to fruition today at the board of supervisors and first, i want to start with our community. i want to recognize those that were, i think, in our 5:00 a.m. session with the giants, the council of community housing organization, peter cohen and fernando, teresa imperial, ian

lewis and mike casey of local 2 who brought the lollypop rings so we could have our own world champion rings at the table and united educators of san francisco and finally, she's no longer with us today but april from my office who spent quite a bit of time working on the negotiations and this deal. i also want to thank our residents that have been actively engaged in this process over the last ten years. the central waterfront advisory committee, the south beach rincon neighborhood association, and their chair, and the advisory committee, alice rogers, toby levine and of course i want to recognize the project sponsor, the san francisco giants for really truly committing to a project that works for san francisco.

their very mucher that lives in san in -- developer lives in san francisco. they're going to see us every day. i think it really matters a lot to have developers that are committed to working through very difficult conversations to figure out how we can come up with a project that works for all of us. of course, i want to also acknowledge the port and our director along with the office of economic workforce development, the planning department, the mayor's office and the city attorney. i will hand over the presentation to the port. i saw -- >> supervisor, before we move into the presentation, there are other members of the board that would like to make comments as well. >> before we bring up the port to speak, we have members of the board that would like to make opening comments, and i know there will be a number of questions from board members about this project. but i do want to just acknowledge that the board knows, we have three more --

several more speakers. they're just here to be available for questions. they will not be presenting. i just wanted my colleagues to be aware of who is here because i know there's a number of questions around schools, child care, transportation, and so we want to make sure that folks know who is here to present and ask questions to. >> thank you, supervisor. colleagues, i just wanted to take this opportunity to reiterate a few comments i made in committee about this project. this project represents a significant opportunity to transform an under utilized portion of our waterfront into desperately needed housing, parks, and new job opportunities. i'm excite to be a coresponse or and look forward to seeing this project completed. one of the components that i'm

most excited about and why i coauthored the legislation is the amount of affordable housing and middle income housing that's being created. 40% of the units will be affordable, and they will be affordable to a wide range of income. this is exactly how we should be developing affordable housing in san francisco. it will be for low and middle income residents earning up to possibly 150% ami. this range captures, as supervisor kim has stated, so many people. i'm hoping as a result of this project, that many of the people who are members of local 2, who work at the ballpark, can actually qualify for the housing that's right next to the place that they work. so we have, along with our neighborhood preference legislation, along with the opportunities that will exist here for affordable housing of all income ranges, we are

hopefully not just going to create a new opportunity for housing. we're going to make sure that residents of this city, people who are part of the workforce in this city and at the ballpark actually have a real opportunity of living close to where they work. i'm excited about seeing that happen. very few projects have been able to accomplish this affordability level, and i hope that this is an example of how we deal with development projects in the future moving forward in san francisco. what a great opportunity. it's taken us a while to get to this point, and i just can't wait until we break ground and move this project forward. with that, i know that there are other members of the board who would like to make comments, and i will start with supervisor yee. >> thank you, president breed. one of the most exciting things about becoming a supervisor five years ago was this project

actually. i entered it when it was -- probably was under several years of discussion and so forth. i got really excited about it because two things that i mentioned i wanted the giants to focus on at the time right before they were going to present it, was about housing for families and the notion of having services like child care on the premises of their development. i remember the first discussion i had with them, they kind of looked at me and said, what do you mean family housing? the other thing was, geez, nobody really asked them about child care. so to their credit, about a week

before we had to vote on the term sheet, they came in and talked about family housing in a big way. that was really five years ago. that was the beginning of my discussions of what we have developed in the city, but city planning had the position paper and family housing. and the other thing that they took into consideration and took seriously was to build child care centers. it was something i got excited about and wanted to support the project then. i have to say, i got a little nervous in the last few days whether i really wanted to continue supporting this project because i found out the child care piece wasn't even in the term sheet. they were talking to me as if it

were. i had a quick discussion with the giants organization, mr. blair, and he reassured me that no, no, no, we're going to keep to that commitment. so i'm glad in your presentation, in your earlier presentation, in terms of the public benefits, that under housing affordability, you have not only family sized units but on site child care. i want to make sure that they went furthers than that. i asked that we have documentation because this is a long-term project that child care will not only be considered but actually built. so i want to submit to -- i don't know who i submit this to, but i received a letter from the giants organization to re-enforce that they will be looking at child care facilities

and incorporated it into the project. do you -- madam clerk, am i supposed to submit it to you. >> we're happy to take that, madam, president, for the file. >> again, i'm glad that the giants organization stepped up under commitment and i'm going to be very happy to be supportive of this project. >> thank you, supervisor yee. supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam president. first of all, let me associate myself with the words of supervisor kim. i saw this in its earliest incarnations back in the days of darius anderson and various other competitors, and i'm delighted the way it worked out. i want to underscore something, to the port, we all know this, these are lands of the state of california that we hold in trust

for the people of the state of california. the process has been long and remarkably fruitful and productive. as a result, we have these images of open space, appropriate housing, not the 300 foot towers that were originally proposed. i want to take a moment to actually underscore something that the few remaining supervisors here -- i was not on the board when the 8 washington matter happened. but that was a shot that was heard around the world relative to how we treat the waterfront, how we actually respect the waterfront, and that ultimately rolled into proposition b. i wanted to use this opportunity to say the greatest thing that ever happened to seawall lot

337, lot a as we call it, was proposition b. we were able to go to the voters and have them participate in the kind of process that we are now voting on here today, and the reason i bring that up is because as those individuals from the port of san francisco well know, we are on the eve of settling hopefully -- knock on wood -- that lawsuit. i just want to underscore that at this moment in time, jack, because i'm looking at you, because you started that thing, that actually it was the right thing to put that power in the hands of the voters. i say that as a member of the california coastal commission pursuant to the coastal act because there are things that are so precious in the state of california, our bay, our coast, and yes, they should be developed and yes they should have maximum feasible public access. the most affordable housing, the most amount of open space.

we ultimately achieved that and voters and citizens have to be part of that process. i'm delighted that the lawsuit is being settled, and i also note that it is -- it need not have happened, and with that, i look forward to voting for this thing. congratulations, fran. congratulations, jack and larry and the rest of the team and all of the members of the city family, roscoe, who made this happen and hats off to jane kim and her staff and april who went through incredible negotiations to get the maximum amount of affordable housing. >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you. supervisor kim, i don't know if i'm overlooking, but i was wondering if there's anyone here from mta. >> i said carly is going to be here. she is here. >> great, because i still have questions about transportation. is it okay if the presentation happens first and then we go to questions? >> yes. >> we have noted the questions

on transportation. i believe she has gotten them in advance. >> okay. thank you. so supervisor cohen, did you have any further comments? supervisor kim, you have additional comments? >> i just forgot to also acknowledge a few other folks. the former mayor, former state senator who were also there that night as well as john as well. so that's it. >> thank you. seeing no names on the roster, we can begin the presentation. >> thank you. i'm with the port of san francisco to drill down into a microscope into one aspect of the project that under state law we're required to speak to you about and has a separate action and that's the infrastructure financing district. the infrastructure financing district is a key financing source that among all the complex financing sources you saw, this is the one we're relying upon to help fund

eligible costs and those include items like backbone infrastructure, public parks, short line adaptation, and historic preservation. the item before you would establish the creatively named project area i which is adjacent to the mission rock site. it would be within the existing port wide ifd. establishing the ifd would allow the port as the city's fiscal agent to direct the city's share of new property tax dollars. it equates to 65% of the tax dollar that would go to the eligible sources or eligible uses that i mentioned earlier, infrastructure, public parks, rehabilitation and shoreline protection. estimate costs include about $191 million for backbone infrastructure in 2017 dollars. we also have estimated about $90 million in historic preservation

for pier 48. that may be different depending on who the tenant is and what their needs are. we have part of the infrastructure financing plan the ability to direct money from the property tax from the site to future seawall improvements that are identified. they are working on identifying these right now, and future sea level rise improvements that would be needed on site and also port wide. this is the funding source that we can use into the future over the 45-year term of the ifd to protect other parts of the city from sea level rise issues or threats. i mentioned earlier this is a microscope on one funding source. the project has several other funding sources including community facilities districts. these are special taxes on top of the traditional property tax in san franciscoment these are taxes that would be above and beyond that. they would go to infrastructure costs as well as on going operations and maintenance costs

for parks and street maintenance. i wanted to mention developer capital is a key funding source. port has the ability to invest in the site and receive a return on that investment. we also have proceeds from land, that is, for parcels we select to use prepaid lease revenues. those would be a lump sum payment for -- to help finance us through the infrastructure costs that we know are coming through the financing plan. that concludes my presentation on the infrastructure financing district item and we're available to you for questions. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i just want to ask the same question that i asked last week. i think it's important for the members of the board to hear this as well. you know, one of the major concerns with these big projects, like treasure island and shipyards and park merced is that we have to build the

infrastructure. we ask the developer to front the financing for the infrastructure that's associated with building this new neighborhood. the things that people often don't think about, but the horizontal development, so the sewage, the lights, the grid, the streets, the parks and all of that. so we've seen, you know, of the 30,000 units of housing that we have already entitled, that they're not getting built because of the immense cost, up front costs of building this infrastructure. i was hoping you could talk about how we ensure this project doesn't fall victim to the same kind of -- to the same challenges and that we'll be doing everything that we can to ensure that the shovels go in the ground and housing that we fought for along with the 40% gets built as quickly as possible. >> thank you for the question, supervisor. we are concerned about this as well because we get such great outpouring for this project and we don't want to have the disappointing action occur where we're waiting for the shovels to

get in the ground. i wanted to make two comments on the question. one is we worked hard with the city attorney to make sure our transaction document has an outside date for pull full performance, but we negotiate the outside date for the giants to put in their application for phase one to be no more than three years after approval and throughout the process, we have these milestones where we're working closely with them to make sure that they are moving the project along. otherwise, the port has remedies. one other inning this, the port commission today, recently the board heard the pier 70 waterfront project. that is at the port commission today with their phase one application. we've been very pleased with how quickly that item is coming forward and we have a similar schedule with the giants, if approved today, we're going to state lands and completing the application and processing and then they have plans for beginning construction this year or beginning their application this year. >> thank you so much.

and also, i mean, if it's okay, i would just love the project sponsor to address this question as well. we would love to have them discuss in public some of their plans and ideas to make sure that we get this project moving. >> thank you, supervisor. we very much want the project to move as quickly as possible. as rebecca mentioned, we have every intention to file our phase one application this calendar year with a goal to ground breaking in 2019. we, too, want to see the project get off the ground and move as quickly as possible. so we're very much committed to that. >> great. thank you so much. finally, since many of our departments are here today, i just want to say that i hope that we work in advance on a lot of the design and approvals for the infrastructure. it's been incredibly frustrating for so many of our residents. i know he knows this as well, to see streets and playgrounds get

completed by the project sponsor and for it to take a while for the city to be able to accept the conveyance of that work. of course, we don't want to accept anything that's not up to code and up to standard. i'm not saying that we should be accepting streets that don't work for the city, but i just hope that we can do the advanced work so that when the streets are done, we're able to accept them in a timely manner so our residents can enjoy them as soon as possible. so i know that there are a number of questions from my colleagues on the board. this is the time to ask them. i know supervisor cohen had a series of questions on transportation. supervisor fewer had some questions around public schools and education allege -- educational needs. >> supervisor cohen, would you like to begin your questioning? >> thank you. i would. hi, carly. come on down. i will say this. i've done a lot of work with not

only the neighbors but with mta in this area. transportation is an issue and concern. transportation could ease the projected congestion that will come in this area of the city as well as help with the fluidity and mobility along the southern waterfront. but i'm kind of concerned because i don't see anything that has the transportation commitment. i'm wondering how mta plans to mitigate the congestion from this development. >> thank you, supervisor cohen. carly payne. pardon me. there are -- i'm going to give you two parts of an answer to your question. one is about mitigating impacts of congestion and from that i'm going to address the particular environmental mitigations that were identified in the environmental analysis.

in the environmental review documentation, there were some impacts identified, and in particular, there were impacts identified of potential transit delays on the third line, which were identified to be mitigated through prevention for access to the garage, designing the garage access with right in, right out so there's minimizing crossing the t third line. we really do not want to see all of the investments that we are putting into the it third line in the central subway and increased frequency, be undermined by cars stopped in the middle of the intersection. this was something we were very focused on. so there are a series of mitigations that get at making sure that that doesn't happen. so there's a whole series of

prevention items there. there are pedestrian safety issues related to additional volumes on 4th street, adding new signals, and event management around events at at&t park because although at&t park is not this project, this project does include a parking garage facility that, in part, provides parking for attendees at the ballpark. in terms of mitigations, i think those are -- and then there's transited capacity in which the project sponsor is responsible for paying for some portion of new buses for particular bus lines. >> separately -- sorry. >> i was going to say, these are words. right? i mean, i'm looking for something that's written down that we are able to hold the agency accountable, that we can point to in years past -- excuse

me -- in future years as to how we thought about the transportation, the moving and the flow. so this is one part of the project that still concerns me. i just don't see anything. all i hear are words. i want to see words on paper, not words in the air. >> all of those mitigations are in the mitigation claim separately in the transportation exhibit of the disposition and development agreement. there's documentation around how we will invest the transportation fees that the project generates. similar to the pier 70 project, which we worked on with your office, what we did, because of the proximity of the two projects geographically and because of the overlap in build-out between the pier 70 and mission rock, we developed a shared list of transportation

investments, which reflect what they feel like are the needed projects. we worked with neighborhood groups to get their approval and met with various supervisors offices to review these. among those projects are things to really re-enforce the investments right-hand a the t third corridor and add investment around bus lines that serve the area, create new connections where there are gaps in the bicycle and pedestrian network, and really invest additionally in water transit. so those -- how those funds will be spent and the commitment from sfmta also to seek other sources of funds to advance those projects while we wait for the transportation fees to come in over the course of buildout, that commitment is also in the

document. i'm not sure if that's what you're looking for or something else. >> more or less it's kind of what i'm looking for. thank you. i appreciate it. thank you. >> okay. thanks. >> can i ask a follow-up question to the transportation, mr. president. >> yes. >> i was hoping you would just talk specifically about what was in the transportation exhibit in terms of what sfmta is committed to funding use the impact fees but also transportation funds. if you could talk about specifically what they are envisioning. >> absolutely. i'll preface by saying this project, because of its date of application was grandfathered at a lower fee rate and through the negotiations, they're paying the full equivalent of the transportation sustainability fee, which is about $40 million. as i mentioned and as you probably all know, these fees come in as the building permits are drawn. so with a phased project like

this, the fees will be coming in over the course of the project. so i just want to reiterate. everything that i mentioned today, i'm about to mention, we're also going to be trying to advance those projects so that we're not waiting until those last phases are built to complete our investment in this. then we will be repaid by the fees. so the things that are -- and for those of you who want to follow along in your documents, this is exhibit b 7, the transportation exhibit to the disposition and development agreement. so water transit, which could ba project, but the money would go there. so investment in the 16th street ferry landing or other water transit network investments along the waterfront. >> could you tell us where this project is at right now? i know this is with the port. but where are we at? >> i prefer to defer to somebody else who is more familiar with

where that project is. adam? >> thanks. >> that has come up in our discussions as well because we're one of the funding bodies for this project. >> the 16th street ferry landing is a port project. i've been participating in those meetings. it's 60% designed with the expectation of completing all of the soft costs, the design and permitting this calendar year. we're looking to identify all the construction funding to deliver that ferry landing in the next couple of years. one of the options for that is regional measure three, which this body knows quite a bit about for the june ballot, if we're successful with the voters in june, this would be an eligible project and could start construction as early as 2019. >> what do we expect would come with this new ferry terminal at 16th street and who would they be serving.

>> it is a double sided float at 16th street near the under construction chase center in mission bay. it would serve the water emergency transportation agency, richmond, oakland, alameda as well as golden gate ferry, which serves the north bay. >> and also, i understand that we'll be considering water taxis and smaller ferries as well. >> there's a separate dedicated landing south of the ferry landing. >> thank you so much. [ please stand by ]

add added capacity meaning additional rail cars and new buses for area bus lines,

expanded facilities at the metro -- metro east bus and rail yard. east west bike connecter between the 17th street bike corridor and 4th street and owens. it's really closing an important gap in the bike network. the bikeway on cherry francois build. and closing of gaps in the pedestrian network and safety. >> thank you. i feel increased bus service is going to be key, too. i want to concur with supervisor cohen. i understand her frustrations of meeting the transportation needs of mission bay and dog patch down to the bayview, i don't feel is served by our current

public services. have you ridden the t at that time? >> yes. it's so frustrating. you're literally packed in and we're growing these neighborhoods in mission bay and dog patch and they are becoming not real alternatives for our residents and so they have to rely on cars to get around the city. our mission bay residents get served better by the t line because it's closer to downtown but b, the t line doesn't make it down to the bayview because it often turns around, which is so disappointing to folks who have to ride the t the whole way

and get off at mission bay or dog patch and wait for the next train that may or may not go to the end of the line. it's one of the slowest lines i have ridden. i can't believe i miss the 15 kearny that ran faster from the bayview to chinatown. but we invested all this money in the t-train and you know supervisor cohen and i talk about it all the time. i don't know what we can do to make it better. i'm worried about it meeting the need for the growing neighborhood. okay. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you supervisor safai, i was a substitute for the government

audit and oversight committee, i filled in for aaron peskin and when i heard this came before the committee, i raised concerns about the lack of a school at mission bay and i wanted to just say that i think this is a wonderful development. there are many wonderful things about this development, the 40% below market rate units, the open space, the attention to economic development, the coffee shop, retail space, markets, i think there are a lot of things that are really good about the development on a lot not previously used for anything but maybe parking cars. but i have to say that after even having heard today about all the parties that were brought to the table to build this community, that no one thought of contacting the san francisco unified school district. and i have to -- i was on the

school board for eight years and this was something that i really worked on because we discovered at a late date that actually san francisco unified school district was five schools behind the building of new developments in san francisco. that is unusual for san francisco public schools because we had a declining enrollment that it looks like now, they have an increasing enrollment. so i was very concerned that there wasn't a school there and i think i voiced it at the committee that it's not just enough to build the units for families. it is about building a community for them where they'll have viable lives and their children will be successful in the 21st century. when we're looking at 40% below market rate housing, we know the families will be dependent on the public school system and i admit i'm bias. i was on the school board for

eight years and four generations of my family have been educated through san francisco public schools. we have school-aged children in the units, i want to capture as many public school students as we can and offer them the quality education that our public schools offer every day to other districts. so it was very concerning to me but out of that i think came a robust situation with the unified school district with planning and the port to look at how we can provide a really solid educational experience for those families that will be living there. i think we're -- sfuc is a little behind the game and have had a transition with superintendents and blah, blah, blah. i want to say i concur with

president breed, i would love local two workers to live there. i would love for their children to be able to go to schools in their neighborhood, too. i think when we look at projections, it's a very difficult thing to project how many students we can capture. we already have a population of school-aged children living in mission bay and those parents have been screaming for a school and now, through this robust conversation we discovered that now the sfusc has not been around the table for the planning. we are going to see more affordable housing and many more units of family housing and yet we have no school to educate the children and there are projections that show we'll be overcapacity at the site a

lotted for mission bay, for a school there. through this robust conversation, through the planning department, oawd and the port and myself, we're able to identify there is a gap that- in expertise that prohibits san francisco unified school district for rushing through or really starting the process of planning with the city for this new community. and to make sure there's an educational -- solid educational experience pre-k through 12 for these students. and so, while i think that all these things are great that is happening there, i feel very strongly that the missing component here is a public school 25% has been estimated -- 25% of commute morning traffic are parents driving their kids

to school. i think in mission bay we have an opportunity to build a school that actually compliments what is happening at mission rock. so i would like to ask the giants, as the developers, because i think after conversations with the giants through the representative roszko mats that they recognize also that they also want to build really strong community and it is their intention actually to build really strong communities and would love to partner with the san francisco unified school district in making the school a reality for the parents at mission rock and the community already there at mission bay. and looking and setting an example for all the developers in the central soma plan to be collaborating with the san francisco unified school district to curate a really

strong educational experience for the families that are living there. so i just have a question actually for jack baird, that when we looked at the gap that the san francisco unified school district has, and you know, jane kim, myself and supervisor norman yee, we know about the school district and how underfunded it is, this is not something they anticipated, to have to build new schools in such expedited manner. would you be willing to assist them with acquiring a demographic study that could do projections on student enrollment and what they might be needing to build. when we spoke to the unified school district, they said we don't know it's a k-5 or k-8. we don't know where the middle

school will be, we don't know where the high school will be or how many students to project for or housing in part of the school. so i'm thinking and actually speaking with deputy superintendent, he identified that this is kind of a gap. i know the giants have done a lot to build the community here, i think what i'm asking is if you'll work in the partnership who doesn't have a lot of experience building new schools. i'm wondering if you would be willing to be a very strong active partner in helping them i think secure these -- the analysis of future demographic projections for schools in that particular neighborhood. >> we're very happy to help the

school district in this effort. the school site that's been selected is just a block from mission rock and we're very motivated to see this happen, to provide the resources and help to the school district necessary to make sure it happens as soon as possible. >> supervisor fewer: thank you so much. i think that will go a long way to push the school districts to start robust planning around this area. and i think the giants have been great partners in this whole thing. i know it is difficult to have everyone at the table. i want to take some responsibility having been on the school board, while discussing the building of the mission bay school and i was the one to help get it on the bond because i knew how important it was, but that, you know, it didn't happen and i want to own that as a commissioner on the

school board, but now as a supervisor in the city family, i want to own the fact that the zoning department has not planned well when planning the new communities that need great infrastructure but not planning well with the unified school district and i think we can do better on this. i want to thank the san francisco giants for stepping up and being a good role model and supervisor kim has said i want more schools in my neighborhood. so i'm hoping to get that started and hopefully it will coincide with the new population coming in. thank you very much and i want to thank my colleague supervisor jane kim. i know that this is hours and hours and hours of hard work and more than hours, months and years of hard work and really