aggregate. >> clerk: item number one, call to order. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: okay. you have a quorum. >> thank you. thank you, everyone, for being here, and for those that are watching remotely, and we appreciate your presence today, and those in the audience. i see jill mantin. nice to see you, jill, and the rest of your staff and guests. okay. let's move on. >> clerk: item number two, general public comment. >> are there any public comments? seeing none clerk cl.

>> clerk: item number three, consent agenda. approving the minutes of the engine 19, 2018 meeting. >> i move for approval. >> i second the motion. all in favor? the aye's have it. thank you. >> clerk: item number four, dda commercial leasing division. >> thank you. directors, chair richardson. bob beck. in light of the discussion last week during public comment at the board meeting on the concept of a treasure island sailing science museum, had -- last september, we had done a presentation on how we would propose that unsolicited proposals be addressed. and following up on that, i wanted to go into a little detail just in the explicit terms of the disposition and

development agreement as it relates to the development of commercial sites -- the key commercial sites on treasure island and yerba buena island. so again, in 2011, we adopted different disposition documents, but today, the dda lays out tida's rights and obligations as it relates to the commercial sites on the island. and the key commercial sites that are -- you know, we have a larger mixed-use zone on the island where some retail or commercial is provided, but the dda identifies the indicated properties as key commercial sites. the island center core

encompassing building one, to the west, block m-1, between building one and hangar two, hangar two, hangar three, are all part of that key commercial sites or critical commercial sites. and then, additional commercial sites include the treasure island and yerba buena hotel sites, as well as the historic structures on ybi. so as i highlighted, the treesh island key commercial sites include that center core running along the center shoreline from building one to hangar three. and then, indicated in blue on this diagram, the hotel site is not defined as a critical commercial site, but a noncritical commercial site

along with the hotel site on yerba buena island and the senior officers' quarters historic district, which encompasses not only the residential buildings on ybi, the historic residential buildings, but also the torpedo building on the west tip of ybi. under the dda, tida has the mission but not the requirement to improdevelop these properti. if they don't, they are supposed to put them out as an auction for a development opportunity. and in terms of opportunity for building one and hangar two, it's within ten years of major phase approval.

again, as a reminder for folks, major phase approval occurred in 2015, so we -- it would be within ten years of that or by 2025 to be entered no a bdda or auctioned off those sites, and for hangar three, it's an additional five years by 2030. the development of the mixed-use blocks, m 1 a and m 2 a, there's not a time constraint; however, there is -- that is the retail main street that connects building one to hangar two. on the noncritical commercial lots, it provides that ticd shall enter into an auction for the rights to the vertical development opportunities for here. this includes as i mentioned, both hotel sites on treasure island and yerba buena island

as well as for the buildings kpriezing the strategic -- the senior officers' quarters district. and the timeline for the ybi hotel site and the officers' quarters area is no later than five years after the outside date for completion of infrastructure and stormwater management controls from the dda's scheduled performance. so just recapping, again, ticd is granted through the dda key -- the development rights for these key commercial sites, and if they decline to exercise those rights, they're supposed to auction them off. and that any changes to the adopted land use plan in particular required ticd consent. also, under the edocma, we have

a waterfall financial agreement with the navy, and where if ticd meets certain return thresholds, ti -- the navy would receive a supplemental payment, and therefore, any changes that we do to the land use program or to the auction requirements would be subject to navy review and consent to show that their financial interests are proposed. so as we -- as we proceed with the sailing center and speaking with mr. hancock, having encouraged him to reach out to ticd and present them with a final pro forma and a business plan for his concept, but that's really kind of the starting point in -- in that discussion. so i just wanted to highlight that for you and if you have any questions, i'd be happy to answer them. >> commissioner, question?

>> yeah. thank you very much for the information. it again, refreshes our memory about the timeline as well as the leasing obligations and how the various land uses will be developed over time. and i'm sure that there's many unsolicited proposals that do come in for worthy causes as well as worthy enterprises, but if what you're saying, mr. beck, is that the -- because our master lease is with tidc ---cd partner, that those proposals first need to be vetted through them, is that correct? >> yeah. the -- yeah, the -- really, because those economic development rights were granted to ticd in the dda, that ise

starting point for somebody that wishes to make a proposal is ticd and see if it's one that ticd would either be interested in partnering in or something that would waive their development rights. >> thank you. >> i have a question regarding the non-commercial lots. in particular, the block c2h. and you mentioned here, with the language deemed appropriate. it doesn't seem to be a timeline there, that, you know, for any kinds of action auction to take place. was that really defined in the dda? how do we treat that? -- this particular block? i know that the other blocks, the y-2 have within the five years, but that particular one, it's not -- doesn't seem to be a definite timeline why, and how do we treat that?

>> yeah. and i think that was -- it -- you know, it gives ticd kind of sole discretion for that site. as part of their park improvements for the west side, the city side park, they proposed to incorporate on the block c2h some temporary park improvements so that it won't be sitting as a fenced-off vacant lot but would be in the interim part of the city side park open space, but i think there's a few factors that led ticd to preserve that flexibility. first, i think that they believe that that hotel site is really suited for development after ferry service commences, and because there's a lot of variability in the timing of ferry service, that was one

reason for flexibility there. i also think that a consideration may be the completion of some of the surrounding development. you don't necessarily want to open a hotel and then develop the site kneeled adjaceimmedia to it. and one of the sites in close proximity to the hotel site is the 450-foot tower site. and again, that site in particular is likely to not be developed at the very beginning of development, but to wait until ferry service and some of the key retail are developed in the island core. so for those reasons, i think some of these are some of the reasons that contributed to ticd pursuing that flexibility in the dda. >> thank you very much. from the audience, are there any questions? seeing none, thank you.

>> sure. >> clerk: item number five, artist selection process update. >> jill mantin is here today from the arts commission and will give an update. >> commissioners, it's very nice to see you. good morning, director beck. things are going -- proceeding according to plan, i'm hoopyapo say with the artist selection process. almost all of the proposals have been submitted. there was a period of preliminary staff feedback regarding technical issues, possible maintenance issues. we are prepared to display the proposals starting this monday on treasure island in building one. there will be 14 boards, some explanatory boards, and then, one board pereach proposal from -- there's seven finalists, two of them have been asked -- asked -- have

been invited to develop proposals for two sites, excuse me. oh, thank you -- [ inaudible ] >> so just to refresh your memory, the selection panel met in december. the visual arts committee had commented and reviewed and commented on the finalists. we were able to achieve consensus from the steering committee to invite the finalists to draw up a proposal, and we made a brief report in january , i believe, at the tida board meeting. so now, as i said, the proposals are coming in. we're going to have a public display -- go to the next slide. following the display at tida, we're hoping to have a display in city hall, if they can accommodate the 14 boards. if not, we have an alternate

space on the third floor of the veterans building where my office is located, the arts commission across the street. we have the selection panel meeting on april 17th, and just to refresh your memory, the members on the selection panel include board president f fai sen, arts commission president j.t. beltran, and our guest curators from the smi smithsonian institution and sfmoma. on the 16th, we expect the selection panel to make their final decision regarding the three sites: waterfront plaza, building one plaza, and yerba buena hilltop park, and we have those sites laid out for you here. these are our finalists for

waterfront plaza. i'm sorry the text is interfering with the image. this this is not their proposal, these are examples of part work. and then our three finalists again, and yerba buena hilltop park, and the three finalists. and then, following the selection panel meeting on april 17th, conveniently, we have the visual arts committee meeting on april 18th, so we'll be able to obtain comments from the arts commission in very short order. additionally, we will place motions on the agenda for the visual arts committee to authorize the arts commission to enter into agreement with the three selected finalists pending final approval from tida, and which will enable us to contract with the artist as soon as tida has approved the

artist. after visual arts committee on april 18th, and prior to the tida meeting, i believe which is may 9th, we will convene a meeting of the steering committee. hopefully, committee will ratify and accept the panel's recommendations, and then, we will come to tida, assuming all goes well on wednesday, may 9th, for your final approval, and your blessing for the arts commission to enter into agreement with the artist. when the artists were sent their memorandum of understanding to did he right la lane -- develop a proposal, they had to review that, and we're assuming having reviewed that they would be willing to neent a agreement. director beck had asked the commission to work with the city attorney to see if we could stream line the standard city contract that's used, and the city attorney agreed to

remove a few provisions and we're also able to stream line just the format in the appendices which describe the scope of work, but for the most part, we're going to be using the standard city contract, with the exception of afew provisions. so i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. i'd like to acknowledge commissioner sen for making herself available at the several orientations we had. we had hoped to have all of the artists attend a single orientation, but giving people 2.5 weeks notice when they're coming from places around the world proved to be difficult. so we were fortunately able to conduct a few orientations to make certain that the artists were familiar with the site, understood the conditions, the constraints, and had the opportunity to really view the incredible -- incredible

majesty of the view and the sites and learn about the history of the island. so i feel like we're in good shape at this point. >> thank you, jill. questions? >> no, i don't have questions, but maybe i can just make a few comments -- and thank you, jill, so much for shepherding this process. it's been very labor intensive and also a labor of love because in some ways it's such an incredible site and we actually have gotten an incredible response. there's almost 500 artists who applied initially, and then, there was the winnownig doing the selections. the artist that has been selected, they're well known. it's a different group of

artists locally, internationally, and from california, as well, and i think we have gotten a wonderful response. so -- and i think all of them have been so incredibly moved by the sites that they will be working on and very excited about the possibility of working with us on the island. and certainly, as the selection process goes on, when we finally select artists for each one of the sites, that will be coming back to the treasure island development authority board before the arts commission, so that it can be viewed by the commission as a whole, and that that decision, then, would be ratified. so thank you very much, jill, for all that you've done for this. and it's just incredibly exciting for us to see throws first three public art

commissions be carried forth. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, just one question. so hopefully, this'll all work for the ones selected. if one falls through, is there a plan for the back up? >> i think we'll have the selection panels select an alternate for each site, so we would have a back up plan. >> okay. great. thank you. >> and then one step in the process that i neglected to articulate, between now and the meeting of the selection panel, i hope to convene a meeting of the steering committee to gain approval in advance of the budget that will be available for the first artist's contract. we don't necessarily expect that all of the funds will be available. we're hoping that we'll -- enough funding will be available from ticd to enable us to complete at least the design and engineering contract with the artist, so in the next few weeks, we hope to be able to schedule that meeting.

zb >> did you have any questions or comments? >> thank you. ji jill, again. i want to commend commissioner sen for being on the steering committee. for those that are hearing about this for the first time, is that the arts commission, under your leadership, jill, actually went out everywhere, and and you received almost 1,000 entries. it was an exhaustive process, and what is great about the final artists is the diversity. i think we really need to know that because people expect us to have that kind of inclusiveness, and they are international artists, well known, so this is very dpli delighting. i was going to ask about the

budget since there hasn't been any meeting for the steering committee, so that would take place before your meeting convened for the artists, is that the plan? >> yes. i'm working with bob to schedule that in the next -- in the coming weeks. >> the other thing i want to ask you, then, i know to keep the momentum on the press and the marketing -- i know paul wylie was just hitting every major magazine and marketing entity. i think the ones that we have are really great, so keep going and getting more coverage for even this. >> thank you. we hope so. we're very excited. >> that's great. thank you for that. >> thank you. >> i do have one question, jill. i think the public display as the proposal is a great way to advertise to the public as large that there's something happening at treasure island. and where will you be sending

out information about the public space? there's -- as i understand it, there's going to be displays of the entries, building one at treasure island, and then another at some location in the city. >> in the civic center. >> and what sort of outreach do you have to let the general public know? >> we will work with our communications director. we have a large mailing list that the art commission uses, and of course, we'd like to work with treasure -- with t a tida, but i'm also hoping to extend the contract with the publicist we have. her fee is included in my budget request to tida for this year, so i'm waiting to hear back from that. she did a if he nom signal job. at commissioner richards mentioned, we had international

press coverage, in newsweek and the new york times. she does an effective job as well. we have a number of local writers. charles demornay who did a great write up in local press, so we have local press that are already attuned in watching our moves. >> thank you. so please, yeah, that's critical yeah. let's get everyone and please keep going. thank you. >> thanks. >> thank you. any public comments? seeing none, thank you, jill. >> thank you very much. >> clerk: item number six, affordable housing development

efficiencies. >> thank you, directors. i know that there's been a lot of interest in opportunities that will be -- may be available to us to reduce the cost of developing and operating the affordable housing as a means of closing our funding gap on the affordable housing development program. and i wanted to provide an update 6789 it's very mu update. it's very much a work in progress. since we last updated the board in october, mohcd has convened a regular meeting with developers of affordable housing to air issues of -- of

interest, concern, and opportunity to help achieve late mayor lee's goal of bringing more affordable housing to the city. so in -- in those meetings, some of the subjects of conversation have been environmental regulations, as well as mb -- or lb and sbsub contracti contracting -- and sb subcontracting requirements. when we put out an rfq for the development of a city-owned site, the developer is asked to follow the city subcontracting requirement. the -- one of the areas of concern has been specifically the -- the professional

consultants contracting requirement because these teams tend to operate in a very lean and mean approach, and so expanding the team to provide subcontracting opportunities sometimes can -- can both complicate the design process as well as bring some added cost. some other areas also include accessibility requirements, and it's not so much i think a concern to avoid accessibility requirements but really seeking clarity around accessibility requirements and the level of universal access in terms of the number of units within an individual building would need to be designed and constructs for universal access. as well as some of the green building responsibilities, and

that's in some regards more of a citywide conversation than on treasure island. and part of that is in the last few years, the city has instituted the stormwater -- on-site stormwater capture and treatment requirements for new projects, whereas under the master vote minute at treasure island, we have a separate stormwater collection systems, and we do separate treatment of the form water. so that's a cost of treasure island that's being borne by the master development and not being put on the affordable housing sites. but it's an example of the types of green building requirements that other sites have indicated contribute to -- to higher costs. some of the other areas of

exploration on the capitals, the construction side, include possibility of pooling transition reserves, sharing operating subsidies, and then we are looking at treasure island specific cost opportunities, clarifying the instances in which ground vapor barriers may be required. the results of the geotechnical program to be clear for the heights of most of our affordable buildings. the intention is that the geotechnical program will make it so that those buildings can be supported by mat foundations and not requiring piles, and just working with the design teams for mercy and catholic

charities to make sure that they concur with that assessment, because that's large potentially avoided cost for development of the project. as well as clarifying dda rules regarding impact fees and other project requirements. on the operating cost side of things, we're look at a shared property management opportunities, shared services opportunities between sites, and pooled replacement reserves or pooled operating reserves. and each of these have their own challenges, and in part as we develop more and more sites, some of these become greater opportunities within the island as a community, but for the first one or two sites out the door, the opportunities to -- to leverage shared property management resources or shared

services is more limited. of course modular construction is the -- the opportunity that is out there that i think holds the most promise and the most -- captures the most interest and discussion. our presentation last fall followed on the heels of the controller's office issuing their comparative analysis for the potential benefits for modular housing. the -- kind of the key findings for that greatly summarized from our october discussion are that there are the opportunities for modest cost savings, but significant time savings, as much as 30% time savings on the delivery --

construction of building. and that helps save project management and other costs, as well. the -- the potential concerns highlighted in the controller's office report highlighted the relative immaturity of the modular housing market, both from the side of firms available to do fabrication but also general contractors that are experienced with the process of constructing a modular facility in the field. those are opportunities that were noted that should only continue to improve over time as we move forward. also following our discussion in october, the city did come

to agreement to pilot two projects in the city for modular construction. at that time, that does not include a site at treasure island, but we continue to evaluate the potential use of modular construction for both parcel c 3.2 and c 3.1. at this time, 3.2 looks to be -- have more potential for modular construction based on the building layout and the range of units that are proposed. whereas the mercy housing project, while a preliminary projection does show that it could lower housing costs, the

need to move to regular unit dimensions actually creates some inefficiencies in the massing so that the current massing studies are showing a -- us potentially having 15% or more fewer units than we could if we optimized the development on the site. but it's not just a -- the faezibility doesn't just hinge on the number -- feasiblity doesn't just hinge on the number of units that they could create and the amount of time needed to fully fund that project. so obviously if we're delivering fewer units at a lower cost perunit, that's a project that we would be able to move into construction earlier than a one that has more units.

even though the marginal cost of those additional units could be quite low because we're continuing to add -- build units to a building that has fixed program facilities. so as i said, still an ongoing assessment for both of those sites. and these are just some -- some examples of modular construction, too, in the bay area and of very intriguing architecture structure in los angeles. other potential efficiencies that we identify and continue to explore include construction, financing operation, management efficiencies, pooled insurance opportunities, construction general cantations.

in some cases, they relate to city construction requirements, optimizing shared or sharing service spaces and parking and other facility amenities between structures developments. the entire picture of reserves and property management and operation staff, and shared construction costs. and one thing that's worth noting about all or most of these on this page is that they really are most optimal if we're able to move forward with multiple projects in one time frame. but because of the way that our funding accrues, we'll be doing individual projects sequentially every two to three years, which we're going to

continue to pursue these opportunities, but it may be more challenging to leverage those that are construction relates, whereas operating reserves or sharing service spaces or parking, that may be something that will lead to operating efficiencies in the langua long-term, but again would likely accrue to the second, third and fourth projects under a particular program manager as the -- the initial project will need to provide those service facilities. and then, a second or later project by the same program might be able to leverage program facilities that has been built in an earlier or

nearby development. and then again, i just mentioned the challenges that many of these -- these -- these efficiencies face in terms of timing. so continuing to move forward with these discussions, our real focus right now from a funding and strategic approach is looking at the first five development projects, refining the estimated cost for those projects, and the potential availability of funds because it's within those first five projects that we believe we should be able to complete the transition of all of our existing households that are eligible for transition opportunities. and making sure that we accomplish that goal, and then also, that would mean that

there are no constraints on the market rate development posed by the existing housing stock. and then again, continuing to evaluate the potential for modular construction and to add that to be piloted onto existing treasure island projects. i think there may be the belief that two samples is really too small of a project set, and it would be by the third and fourth examples that the city would start to gauge best the potential benefits of modular construction. perhaps our first project and perhaps our second project will still, like the industry, be learning quite a bit about the construction. but we expect that there will probably be more conversation about that after the june

elections. and then, also, continuing to work with the mayor's office of housing and community development, participating in their developer meetings and working with one treasure island and our partners on our first two projects to explore all of the opportunities that i discussed. with that, i'll take any questions you may have. >> thank you. bob. i will point out any questions from the commissioners? >> thank you, bob. i really appreciate this report, because this is the issue which i was very concerned about and had to -- started those conversations a year ago, and i'm glad that it's led to some more conversations about possible efficiencies. and i know that there's many;

that the -- my hope is actually there can be really bold thinking be how we finance, develop and build affordable housing. we have the charge of building 2,000 units on treasure island, and unlike other sites in the city, we have the land already secured, so as long -- as soon as the infrastructure is done, these sites will then become available for the building of affordable housing. and it is such a crisis in our city that having the ability to build 2,000 units is quite, you know, an incredible resource. there's other sites that have been looked at in the city recently, and in order to do an

affordable housing project, some of that cost is approaching 1 million a unit because the land costs have gone up so incredibly. and then, in addition to that, the construction costs. and so i think if there's any chance at all for us to be able to even approach that production goal of 2,000 units of affordable housing which is, in fact, a promise to the city when we put together this master plan for treasure island, we have to find a way to look at it boldly and not to do it on sort of a piecemeal way. there has to be by the city together with the mayor's office of housing, and by the political leaders to see this truly as a resource and to -- and if we're really serious about building those affordable units, we have to have the will

and also the tools to do that with. and so, for instance, there is nothing to stop us from looking at the financing of these projects in a whole way and to put together a subsidy program. of course it's going to require resources by the city. that's not -- that's just a matter of political will -- to put together the resources so that these units could be fast-tracked, and that they can be built more quickly. i do know yes, of course, it's going to require partnerships with the state and hopefully the federal, although the federal is almost out of the picture right now. the state is promising -- promising legislation that was being proposed. but i think the city can put together approval and subsidy

dollars that they are promising to be able to do this project together. you know, we have an economy that is booming, that in terms of real estate value, in terms of economic growth, you know, it's over 1 trillion, actually, in the city. and it seems to me that the resources that we need to build housing is so very limited. and surely, there is the political will to do something that will allow us to build those 2,000 units. so i'm hoping that we can urge both the political leadership in this city as well as the corporations who do business in the city and who also suffer from the fact that there's a lack of affordable housing, that there could be some will to see that this is a resource. we have the land to go ahead with the development, and could

there not be a pool that is -- approval that is put together to allow those projects to go forward more quickly. i am glad that you are going through all the requirements now to do business in the city and to do development in the city. and many of those requirements are laudable. they're goals that we have to attain, but i think we need to look at the costs and if there are better ways to solve those same issues, and it includes the ada requirements, the green building requirements, various hiring requirements. it's a good time to look at all of them to see how we might be able to meet those objectives also in a more stream lined

way. so i'm glad that you have started that process with the mayor's office and with the various nonprofit housing developers that are going to be building this housing. let me say about marginal and prefab housing because my company has done a lot in this area -- and we're talking about not only marginal. there's also prefab factories that make, you know, systems which can be put together much more quickly. and i think that it's true that it's at a time when that whole area of marginal housing is in its infancy, but if you look at other countries that have adopted it, including scandinavian countries, including japan, almost 60 to

70 7 70% of housing incy den is marginal factory housing. in japan, i think it's close to 80%. i think it's something we need to look at here. and here, we have an incredible opportunity, because we have 2,000 units of housing we're going to build and look at ways in which we might adopt some of those new technologies to lower the cost as well as decrease the time it takes for construction. but it is at its infancy, and there are issues around it that perhaps we can solve, and that includes, for instance, the insurance requirement, the subbonding requirement that often becomes an impediment for using the marginal factory processes. but the other thing that i'm concern about is that -- about is that now that construction

prices have spiralled out of site is that construction developers are looking at modular processes. it's bidding up those limited pool and those limited factories, that they're able to also charge more, by then defeats the purpose of what we're trying to do in finding lower cost and better decisions. but in general, i'm glad that we're going in this direction, but i'm hoping that we will look at it to see if there's some bold moves that we can make to be able to finance and develop and build 2,000 units of housing, and so i look forward to further conversation about it. >> thank you, commissioner. commissioner -- director beck? response? >> yeah -- well, no. the commissioner that sends commensends -- tsen's comments brought

something to mind in my presentation, and this may be something that we need to address at the state level, which is we find ourselves in somewhat of a catch 22 in that many funding sources are looking to develop new affordable units. and although the existing community on treasure island was always a temporary use of naval housing, because we are proposing to transition residents from that temporary use into permanent housing, the state doesn't view that as new units. even though the units that, you know, we're replacing were never intended to be permanent because we're transitioning, for instance, catholic charities residents from an existing unit to a new unit.

that's not considered to be an additional or new unit, it's considered a replacement unit. and it just seems that this is a quandary that must be affecting other base reusery programs as well. so it's not something that's unique to treasure island, but the catch 22 that we find ourselves in, that we have to provide those transition units first, before we can get to 100% new buildings, those transition units act as a barrier for us accessing certain streams of funding, and it seems there should be a solution that would acknowledge that although residents are being transition from former navy housing, that that was always a temporary use, and that we're moving them into new, permanent fortivsupportiv

housing, and that that should be considered new. although it's not the same as a shelter, the existing navy housing is temporary housing, and it was never meant to be permanent for anyone. so that -- i just bring that up as a challenge that we're finding as we're trying to find funding for these first few projects, that there are certain streams of funding that we're barred from or do not compete well for because each building will include a substantial number of transition units, and that's just another challenge for us on treasure island as we're moving forward. >> is that something -- we've got great stead led legislation

-- state-led legislation there to represent san francisco. is that something we're having discussions on. >> it's something that's come up in the last month or so, so we're going to approach our lobbyists to see creative solutions to address that. >> thank you, bob, for this presentation. as those that are listening from remotely can see that this commission puts heavy emphasis on housing, on development on the island, affordable housing because we have the homeless population. we also have the transition housing matters that we are dealing with, and we also have the expertise on this commission that can guide the city and all the stakeholders of the one thing that i have found that even the political leaders and city agencies need guidance, so i see this dialogue as a process from what we do here to be able to, you

know, tran laslate and convey to be able to help them out, because on a global scale, it's not all that happening now. the city discussion seems to be segmented. you have the mayor's office of housing and all that, but at some point, ideas that people have should be conveyed across the board and we can take some leadership here. i would like for us to have on our calendar and maybe invite, we have expertise on modular here -- have a set of presentation on modular, and the technology, as commissioner tsen mentioned before, their expertise and their countries, you know, outside of the united states that are really doing well. and i know we've been talking about that here as a solution. so let's bring in here and invite all the stakeholders and see what kind of ideas that we are having on this particular matter.

on the shared efficiency discussion, i, again, would like for us to concentrate more on the financing. we know that we have the funding stopgap, you know, here. and in the boldness that we've been talking about, i said a long time ago that i loike to - these unions, these calpers and some of these organizations have capitals that no one has even tapped. i'm talking billions and billions. san francisco, for instance, low income teacher housing, low income housing and homeless housing. let's have a presentation provided, see the potential there. i really feel strongly on that. the precedent has already been set.

decades ago, the union lent -- 100 million was lent to build a hotel. years ago, i know that mayor brown did that. with regards to the state level, we do have lemgislature, if we are lucky, new some get there's and we have all this funding. so we have all these new challenges, and let's know them, and then, we can present them. we can even invite the legislators every now and then to our hearing because they talk about that all the time. we have all these opportunities, we have everyone right now that can help us to carry this ball, and the supervisors are, you know, very receptive. so i would like to have that in your presentation.

i think it would be great if you can add, every time you make this presentation, to actually have those financing in there. i was looking at some of the materials that you have covered before. and at one point, in one of your presentation it was dedicated to financing. so when you have this, you can probably incorporate that in there, so we can all have, you know, one document, because you've done a lot of work on this particular matter. so i would like for them to be combined so, you know, we can have one document, and we can really present that. so the other thing -- also, i did not see any mentioning about private sector financing. has that been explored before? i mean, what is the thinking on that? that we engage in the private sector for financing or public private partnership? i didn't see any. >> yeah. i think both catholic charities

and mercy are looking at a portion of the development costs being private -- you know, a construction loan, and what the -- you know, the -- those financing costs are built into their current costs projections, as well. >> so mohcd has all the program efficiencies in parking, probably shared space. can they give us a list of models in san francisco already that we can even look at? i know even now and then they mention this project here and there. can you go back to the mohcd and says, all these shared efficiencies that are currently in place in the city now, why don't you provide a list so we can tour the site, we can see and talk to the folks and whatever they are doing? so it would be great to have them list it in a project, you know, all over the city.

i mean, i presume they're already doing that, right? >> yeah. no, and then, there are things already that mohcd is not -- typically are not including in new projects. for instance, elsewhere in the city, new projects are being built without any parking, new affordable buildings, but particularly, again, for our early buildings, although the island will be eventually heavily transit supported or served, our -- our existing residents that will be transitioning are very used to having vehicles -- in some cases, multiple vehicles perhousehold. so there will be some parking in most of our early buildings. not one for one, probably more on the order of 1:3 or 1:5, so

parking will be assigned via a lottery, but there will be some opportunity for parking. but that is something as we continue to develop additional sites and bringing new residents to the island, those -- those building will probably have no parking, which will, you know, help save on costs. >> yeah. so let's have the total picture because it's not one size fits all. some are going to have some limitations in parking, some will have -- and then, when we need from the mohcd all these models that are already without the shared, with the efficiencies that are here that they are promoting, so we can see how they are there, the priorities and how visible. that would be great for them to provide -- you know, they have an obligation to tell us here, too, so i want to see the total picture of people now what they

are talking about, because i know that they're the agency in charge of this affordable housing. so those are just some of the comments i have, but we need a presentation on modular housing if we can get all the experts and all the stakeholders to be out here so we know what the discussions are, and so we can better inform our leaders and, you know, take the front seat in helping mohcd and all the others involved. thank you. public comment? commissioners, any other comments? none? public comments, seeing none, okay. >> clerk: item number seven, discussion of future agenda items by directors. >> well, i would like to see in the last tida meeting, when that temporary housing on the island, i think we need to