two paths the parks code, or the port code, which model to pursue. and an imization of things that we would also anticipate falling under rules and regulations, as well as certain things that we've talked about that may not be within the authority of tida or fall under the code for instance, the management of tour buses. that would be an m.t.a. activity. so things that we may need to look outside of the board of supervisors or the tida port authority to implement as well. and then we'll also be continuing our work, obviously, on operations planning and staffing evaluations and continue to bring you updates on that as well. >> president tsen: excellent. okay i'll open it up to the directors.

>> director lai: thank you. just curious if any outside agencies or consultants are helping you with the reviewing of the various codes, because that's a pretty big undertaking to take to review? >> yeah, what we're working with the city attorneys office and one of the attorneys that is currently part of the land use team was formerly general counsel for the port. so we have overlap there. that is very helpful. >> director lai: as you go through this code review process, i'd be curious to learn more about whether or not something like proposition k for the shadow studies would be triggered if we basically adopt the rec park rules. whether or not who may be setting limits on net new shadow cast on open space, because as i'm thinking about this, we're rolling out and opening new park space before a lot of the

structures, the vertical development is going in, so under project-specific review, that may be triggered. and i'm just not sure from our document whether that was all considered? >> yeah, yeah. i happen to involve transbay. the shadow provisions would not apply to our parks and open spaces. similarly, it's transbay, the rooftop park and the park that is planned to go where the temporary is to go doesn't fall under prop k as well. >> director lai: that's interesting. i perceive a lot of our open spaces to be somewhat different than transbay rooftop park, because it's an elevated, you know, kind of like p-3 structure. >> i think it's just a matter of -- i think i can confirm, but i believe prop k was specific to

parks of recreation and parks department, which ours will not be. so -- >> director lai: okay. >> so it's more definitional exemption. >> director lai: i guess maybe this is more of a future item, but it would be, i think it would behoove us to at least have a discussion around whether or not we want to set any standards or limitations on net new shadow cast on our beautiful expensive new park spaces and just to make sure that we protect them. thank you. >> director richardson: thank you, bob. this is actually very easy. in your opening statement, treasure island is not going to under tida. what we have now, we have the parks. and there is a reason the port maintain their own code. we need to have a treasure island code. we need to take the time to

develop this particular code. it's even, i can assure you that even the parks code in the city and county of san francisco, some of them even need to be revisited and revision. given the fact that when the development agency was disbanded, we have this lingering issues. on the longevity of parks. all those agencies have not delivered results. how they going to do that? and every two years, rec and park. so we need to have our own separate identity here, because you do not want to get caught up with the other, because treasure island is unique. there is no other san francisco neighborhood like this. so all the provisions that we need, we need to go into a comprehensive detail to put our codes together. so the discussion should actually be how do we go about enacting this? what kind of resources will we

commit to that? yes, we need consultant, we need help. i would also suggest all the members that are here, i would like to get a copy of the parks code and the port code. and the port i know that we have just completed, their master plan, and all that information. let's see what could be similar, and then let's see what concentrate on developing our own code and issue being san francisco charter. so that down the line, nobody is confused as to the jurisdiction of who wants to maintain this parks. i think we have the obligation to complete that work as part of our work here, seeing it is supposed to be under the jurisdiction of tida. so the obligation is ours. not park, not anybody else. we can borrow from there. we can borrow from new york. we saw outstanding parks that

commissioner was able to do that. we have models. i would like to see some of their codes to adopt here, because they really showed us around and we saw very successful. and new york is leading in the country in terms of some of the parks that we saw. okay? so let's get all this information. well help you to review the codes and alongside the consultants and we'll put something together. >> thank you, mr. beck. i'm glad you're reviewing both codes. we'll have the time in september to make a decision based on those evaluations and we'll have that discussion at that time. i'm sorry, mr. samaha. >> director samaha: just a quick comment. we have such a diverse type of open space because i think we do transcend both rec and park type of parks in san francisco, and port, because we have the project around the coastal of the island and all that.

so it will be interesting, you know, what kind of hybrid system we do come up with. i want to make a quick comment about the prop k. i mean, we are creating a new residential island here and the last thing i want is to start getting into the discussion of prohibiting development from happening because they are casting shadow on the open spaces. the whole point of this island is not only to have open space, but to create housing. so i really would be very careful in extending those types of rec and park rules as they pertain to prop k and shadows to the island. because we may find ourselves not being able to build anything. thanks. >> president tsen: thank you. we do have a master plan that

has been approved. so i think that gives us an amount of protection. and, mr. beck, i think it's really important, we've been asking this for some time now, another aspect of park operations, which is really to do a very thorough projection of what the budget would be for maintaining these parks. as you know, we can create these parks, but if they're not properly maintained or operated or activated, then those parks may fail their purpose, which is to provide recreation enjoyment for the public at large. so, when do you think, mr. beck, we will be starting a look at operations, budgeting and a maintenance plan? >> we're working on the scope for that right now with ticd. one of their consultants.

we expect to initiate that work within the next few weeks. >> president tsen: okay. if you would give us a report on that in our future meeting, that would be appreciated. >> absolutely. >> president tsen: any public comment on this item? if not, next item, please. >> item number 9, discussion of future agenda items by directors. >> president tsen: any items? seeing none, next item. >> meeting is adjourned. >> president tsen: thank you, all, for attending.

>> good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, june 13th, 2019. i will remind members of the public the commission does not tolerate our burst. silence your mobile devices during these proceedings. when speaking before the commission, if you care to state your name for the record. i'd like to take roll at this time. [ roll call ].

folks, we will start the meeting again. >> excuse me, can we have your attention, please? the chair is a requesting your attention. please take your seats. if you can't find a seat, you can't remain in the room. >> thank you. okay. >> good afternoon and welcome back to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for june 13th, 2019. i will remind members of the public the commission does not tolerate disruption or albert's of any kind. please silencer mobile devices that may sound off during the proceedings. when speaking before the commission, do state your name for the record. commissioners, we left off under your regular calendar on item nine that we are taking out of order. this is an informational presentation.

>> good afternoon, members of the commission. i am with planning department staff. i'm here to introduce informational item 4610-698 brennan, more commonly known as the san francisco flower marked. it is scheduled for your review at a commission hearing on july 18th. before we go any further, i would like to invite someone up who will give a bit of context for where this site is in central soma. >> good afternoon. planning department staff. the project before you today completes a set of key sights in the south area south area of the central soma plan. just to refresh you on the open space and public realm network, here are the existing and

proposed sites, together with streetscape improvements that continue to the use and overall experience of the neighbourhood, a lot of these are complementary with one another, and there are some that are recreational, some that are open space, some that are popo, which are privately owned public open space. all neighbourhoods need a mix of spaces, of types and uses within open space for recreation, activity, and social space to serve a variety of people in daily needs. this is the last of the four, and the one we will see today, the flower marked is in blue. just to zoom in a little farther , we had 598 brennan, what you talked about last week. the creamery, and the tennis club that were here for informational his and we will be returning, and then the flower marked in blue presents open space that is, includes a market , plaza, and retail alley.

these are all connected through the walk that i described over a month ago from south park through the block, around the subway, through to the new central soma park, as part of 598 brannan, and across the mid block alley. this works together as a network of bicycle lanes, proposals, streetscape improvements, as well as the individual popo and park. this is the fourth of the set in the project. i will hand it back over to ella >> thank you. the project request a large project authorization and office allocation for the demolition of the existing flower marked or the buildings, and surface parking lots. the construction of three new buildings. these are commonly known as the market hall building, the block building and the gateway building. in total, the project would provide $2 million -- 2 million

square feet of boxes -- office. 1,000 -- 113,000 square feet of production distribution repair, which will be the new replacement wholesale flower market. 83,459 square feet of retail, 769 offstreet parking spaces and below grade garages, 30 loading spaces, 496 bicycle parking spaces, and it also includes 35,450 square feet of privately owned public open space, popo for short. it would provide another 5,193 square feet of off-site open space. the project also requires and entails a development agreement and associated planning code amendments. the project site is located within the zoning districts, as well as 130 c.f. and the 270

c.f. height and bulk district. at the behest of the wholesale flower market vendors and management, the project sponsor in the city have included in the development agreement, an option for the wholesale flower market to permanently relocate to a new site within san francisco, in lieu of the project sponsor building a new wholesale flower market on site. should the flower market vendors and management exercise this option, the project a variance would contain 2 million square feet of office space, 90,000 of retail, 22,000 square feet of childcare facility, 950 square feet of community facility, and then an increased 38,450 square feet of popo. to begin the sponsor's presentation, i would like to introduce and from the mayor's office of economic and workforce development to a walk you

through the development agreement. after her, mike kerr so from kilroy realty will present the project. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i will provide a brief overview of the agreement for the development and outline how the city proposes addressing the potential scenarios. the need for scenarios became necessary late last year. one potential plan was finalized , the flower vendors recognize that the increased residential and office density, along with the infrastructure improvement designed for safety and safely accommodate increases in bike and pedestrian access that would result in challenges for the vehicle of intensive reality of operating a major wholesale flower distribution business. it is made up of over 50 independent small business owners who accommodate 4,000 small and large businesses

across all of northern california on a weekly basis. most of the florists, grocers, tailors, designers, and wedding planners arrive in small or large trucks, delivery vans or other vehicles in which they need to load pallets of flowers and supplies. they rely on easy circulation and adjacent access to the market warehouse. in order to ensure that set that cisco is able to retain and support the continued success of the flower marked, we've developed a structure that will allow the vendors to make an election at their sole discretion to either return to brannan street or elect an alternative permit location in scenario b. i want to be clear that in either scenario, the project sponsor will be responsible for constructing a temporary facility at the p.u.c. on site located at 2,000 moran. as soon as the first phase of the primary project is approved, the developer will begin the site improvement and construction of the interim site as soon as a temper site is

ready, the sponsors will move the vendors to the interim location and cover all the relocation costs. the developer will enter into a mini and four year lease with the p.u.c., which commences upon move in of the flower vendors. scenario a is straightforward. the vendors elect to return, and the developer moves in from the tempera site into the new building upon completion. in this scenario, the developers providing the benefits and outline the hundred 15,000 square feet of on site affordable p.d.r. space, 100,000 square feet of neighbourhood serving retail, 15,000 square-foot off-site land dedication to the mayor's office of housing for development of 100% of 40 will housing, 36,000 square feet of privately owned open space, 5,000 square feet of off-site public open space and enhanced workforce program that includes office and p.d.r. job training, 500 bike parking spaces, a formula public arts contribution, and nearly $170 million in impact fees,

including $58 million in job housing linkage fees. the city will use 20 million of these fees to help stabilize housing for existing residents by securing small sites for acquisition rehab. scenario b. is triggered if the flower market elects not to return to brannan street. wants a primary project is approved at the board of supervisors this fall, the flower vendors will have up to 120 days to make an election to stay or move to an alternative permanent location within the city and county of san francisco if they choose not to return, scenario b. sets up the following structure. within 30 days of the election, kilroy will make a $1 million payment to cover the cost of due diligence and predevelopment work for the alternative permanent flower market site. once those dollars are exhausted , the developer will continue to pay these costs as they accumulate once the vendors have completed predevelopment and are ready to begin construction, kilroy will pay the total amount required to

build the new wholesale flower market by dividing a rental subsidy and an equity contribution to cover the project development funding including construction, taxes, insurance, maintenance, management fee and capital and maintenance reserve accounts. we are still working through the specific details and will provide a full account may come back to this commission in july with the details. also in scenario b., the developer provides all the community developments with the addition of the 23,000 square for childhood centre, in 1,000 square-foot centre community room, and programming for neighbourhood organizations that include flower shows, job fairs, farmers markets and art markets. finally, that is it. finally... in light of the large

allocation required for this project's first phase, i would like to take a minute to make sure we provided you with the facts about the project timeline , the projected timeline of the proposed allocations for all large projects currently in the pipeline. a few weeks back, staff provided a detailed update about the upcoming large project pipeline, the amount of prop m. available, and the strategy of phasing projects and distributing projects. we created this spreadsheet to clarify the amount of allocations currently available, how much will be allocated that the first phase of the project in the centrosome a pipeline, the dates when the projects will draw down on their already approved allocations, and finally, how the annual replenishment allows for the majority of a nonford project to receive at least their first phase by the end of 2021, and all of the noncore projects will

receive their projected allocations by the end of 2025. to summarize, employing the phasing and running the strategy recommended by planning staff, the commission will be able to satisfy 62% of the total centrosome a allocations by the end of this year and 100% by the end of 2025. that concludes my presentation and i will be available for questions. >> thank you. do we have a presentation by the project sponsor or is that it? okay. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm here representing the project. thank you. our senior vice president and is also here with me today and will be available for questions. it has been a long time coming. i know you heard some intros and i wanted to give an intro from our side as well on the project before we go into the design

presentation. we have been working with the flower vendors in the city for the last five years to design a unique mixed-use project that fits the fabric of centrosome and provides a much-needed new home for the wholesale flower market. since the beginning, our plan has always been to build a new state-of-the-art wholesale flower market as part of the project. throughout the years, we have been working with vendors and architects to define the design of the wholesale market. at the end of last year, after working on and solving additional concerns from the vendors, they let us know they appreciated all the work we had done to design a market that works for them, what they are concerned about the changes in the neighbourhood and the options to move somewhere else permanently. while we were stunned and saddened by the sentiment, we remain committed to preserving this 100-year-old institution in san francisco, whether it be on or off site. to that end, with spent the last several months working with vendors and with the city on a variance plan which you will see in the informational design presentation today and will have

the opportunity to consider on july 18th. the plan gives the vendors the power to decide without influence from kilroy or the city which route is best for them. if the vendors choose to stay, we will build a new market to cite -- on-site. if they choose to move, will be responsible for providing 100% of the equity to develop that sight. either way, we will ensure the wholesale flower market as a new permanent home in san francisco at the same guaranteed affordable rent. i want to emphasize no alternate site has been selected, no final decision has been made. timing is key for both variance, is important that the approval happens this year in order to give the vendors the opportunity to choose the best option for their future. in either scenario, they will need to move to an interim location, which is available now , but only for a few years. the move will not affect the construction schedule. while the city is reviewing the permit, will be permitting and building out the interim site

and will be ready to start construction about one year after the effective date of our approval. additionally, to develop many agreement includes, as you've heard, and immediate payment by kilroy upon project approval to give vendors funding to complete feasibility study and make a decision within a set timeframe. again, kilroy wants to assure there's a new wholesale flower market for the vendors in san francisco with guaranteed affordable rent, and first-class new development of centrosome of that provides retail open space in the neighbourhood and jobs and revenue for the city. with that, out pass i pass it on to bob to give you an overview of the design. thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. i will try and take you through this very large project very quickly. i think we handed out -- that may be easier for you to see. this is a view of the project looking at the corner of fifth and brannan at eye level. you can see the market whole

building in the front here, opening up onto the street and being set back from fifth street a little bit. this is not working? okay. all right. okay. this is a aerial view from that same position overlooking the whole project. you see the project is broken up into three different buildings, the market hall in front, the lower building, the block building behind, it is broken into two masses on its own, and then the gateway tower on the

western end of the project. this is not going to work. this is the gateway building here. it is key to the project, and it has got all of the amenities for the community in the ground floor. it has retail and food and beverage uses, and it is ground-floor all the way through the other building to the north is broken up and takes the mass of the building back away from brannan and into the centre of the site. the gateway building, at the western end, is really the marker of the project as you come off the freeway and it really greets everyone coming into the city from that direction.

key to the project is lifting at the market hall and really making it a permeable ground-floor that connects brannan back into the market alley and the retail back there as well as to the flower market itself. you can see the footprint of the flower market is really significant. it is over 115,000 square feet. in order to make that fit in to the neighbourhood, we have pushed it to the centre of the site, and really taken the active uses of retail and the entrances to the offices above, and bring the building with us. you can see, there is retail entrances throughout this site, off the market alley, as well as off brannan and the plaza. the flower market's public entrance from ground-floor is off the market alley in the middle of the project, as was referred to earlier, most of the

uses -- users of the market hall will be coming up from the basement below, they will be driving in with vans and various kinds of checks. and then the office is up above are entered on the two and his of market hall on the far marked buildings, and as well as the centre of the site, and on the western end, at the gateway building. there are three, actually, four main pieces of public privately owned public open space. these are three clauses. the first one is off brannan. it is about 1200 square feet -- 12,000 square feet. is a large plaza that connects the through block pedestrian ways and it allows for programming of all sorts.

we can have various kinds of events there, farmer's markets, performances, et cetera. in the middle of the block you have the oculus breezeway that has an open to this guy atrium space through the building, opening up into the ground floor , bringing light into the middle of the project, as well as opening down into the parking structure, so people coming for retail and other visitors would come up into this space. on the eastern end of the building, at fifth and brannan we have another plaza that is pulled back. the building is pulled back from the street by about 50 feet, and creates this open plaza that the market hall spills out onto. you can kind of see in this, the whole project is raised up 3 feet to deal with the issue of

climate change and ocean rise. site is connected through the block by what we call the market alley. it is next -- it connects from fifth street back to the brannan plaza and then on to sixth street. the alleyway, that pedestrian alley is lined with shops and food and beverage, as well as having places for people to have respite and connect out to the street. you can see in the image on the left, is the entrance to the wholesale flower market, which is over on the left side of the market alley. you can see the market alley opening up onto fifth street, so as you walk along, you will be

able to see into it and be drawn into the activity going on there as you walk along brannon, you will walk along the market hall, seeing all the different activities going on there. further down brannan you see, through to the market alley from the street, through the oculus, and from the freeway, the building is broken up into several different masses that are all a related design, would give the building a sense of scale. the gateway building on the west end creates this connection through the mid-block of the green and really creates an identity at the western end of the site. landscape is used throughout the project, and it will all be

native and low water using, street trees have been selected, as well as trees to protect the on sight. >> you have ten minutes, i'm sorry. >> two quick things. >> wrap it up quickly. >> sure. the building is designed to be built in phases, so the first phase is the block building were the market hall would be in the bottom. the market hall would be the second, and gateway building would be the third. this is the variance if the flower market chooses not to come back. it includes the childcare, the community centre opening up more popo through the market alley, and having more activity space. otherwise, you won't know the difference of the project from the outside and from a community perspective, it will really look the same. >> thank you so much for that presentation.

do you want to say something? okay. with that, we will open this item up for public comment. i do have three speaker cards. [calling names]. [indiscernible] >> i would like to start off by expressing our appreciation to kilroy realty and to the city, especially oewd and the city's

attorney office in helping us work on sculpting a development agreement which will give the market tenants the option to move into a new permanent sight and not returning to its current location. when the original agreement was made for building the new market at its current site five years ago, we did not know that just around the corner of fifth street and brannan street, they would be around 4 million square feet of new office space, with the increased density and traffic, vehicles and pedestrians and bicycles or vendors, customers, his of pliers and delivery companies would have a very difficult time operating the flower marked at its current location. the development agreement gives

us the option of moving to a no location in which our vendors can sustain their owner operated businesses. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is fleming. i am part owner of one of the tenants of the flower market, and we appreciate people working with us trying to keep the flower market together. there are very flew -- few flower markets in this country. we have seen others going through the same situation like us, like in boston and other places where they had to move outside of the city to the suburbs, and the market itself felt a little bit apart. when somebody does move, we just

did not have the funds to put into it. this enables us to keep the flower market together and in the city and gives us a place to function. thank you. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please.

bran nan. >> a lot of our needs for housing space and sustainability and economic development have historically been pushed around about because ever this cultural district partnership there's a

huge opportunity here for the city to coordinate with us and prioritizing a gateway on sixth street. the cultural district has already been in discussion with kill roy and they have expressed interest including a gateway as part of their interest in the community. as commissioners who have an obligation to built a sustainable environment there's a chance to be champions of the soma. to have community facilities and a gateway included in this development agreement is super doable and the absolutely can be done to increase the visibility of a community that has been fighting to stay here. it can pave the way how developers work with the city and with soma filipinos moving forward. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> charlie lafferty asked me to

give the commission his regards. he was unable to make it tonight. while the operating engineers and our fellow brothers and sisters in the building are excited about this project and the number of jobs going to bring to the area, we also have some concerns regarding the amount of office space being used in this project. we feel that this, along with the other south of market office development is going to put a large choke on the amount of office space available for development due to the prop m requirements. we would like there to be a gradual phase in that considers the amount of available labor for these projects. certainly skilled and trained workforce that is going to make these projects successful and make them come in on time and on budget. there's not a million of us out

there and so we want our workforce available for all. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> sue. the flower acceptedder vendors g to stay in the city. they're fighting to stay south of market although the vendors are fighting to stay in the city. and the planning commission has big decisions. the reality of the office development in the next month including the one that was disapproved is all for the tekin does tree.

conveniently, the cal train station is down the street and the housing you are being asked to improve next week is a thousand units of market rate housing with no on side affordability and and it will be upper income rental housing to serve the tekin does tree. notekin does tree.not the filip. it is being approved week by week, month by month. one of the messages you got to give to the developer is the alternative without housing is not acceptable. if the flower vendors move to east of bernal heights and i

would welcome them there. it's the section the produce market has moved out of golden gateway but it's not acceptable to say you are going to build four or five million square feet of office development for the tech sector to get on their train and go down to silicon valley conveniently without taking the pressure out of the housing market. there's a crying need for housing to be built to serve the existing people that are being moved on. the people that work in the city and in your restaurants, in the hotels in this city and the stores in this city that people still pat toront patronize. who are going to be the vendors in this marketplace. they're not going to be able to live in the city. what is the message that you are

going to give them to have tech offices that use space efficiency and so next week a thousand units of housing in kill roy, you are in the crosshairs. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? public comment is now closed. ok. go ahead. please. come on. >> thank you. good afternoon. my name is christine hanson and i'm a san francisco native. i have had the lucky opportunity to personally know flower growers who relied daily on the flower mart.

these folks grow locally and they give modest income. my concern is when the developer said that some day a replacement property may need to be found for the flower mart in our land locked city land is precious as is our flower mart. please protect them and make sure that possibly in four year's time, there's no way that they will be told oh, well, there's just no land. please don't allow that to happen. i am concerned. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comments on this item? with that, public comment is now closed. commissioner richards. >> walk us through the spread sheet again and just -- one of the things we heard was that granting all the 1.4 million square feet to killroy would

hurt other projects when they were able to put their shovels in the ground. could you help us on that? >> sure. it would be great for the public to understand. >> the only allocation that i know the numbers on are the three that are in front of you in this current summer phase. which are the 590 brand and allocation you approved last week and then the project which is coming in for the first phase some time this summer as well. and so, i don't want to turn that off again. what we know for certain right now is that right now, we have the actual allocation in the bank of 2,892,466 square feet

and in non port projects in front of you this summer, the total allocation is 2,564,765 feet. we expect the port to come in the next several months with a allocation request for 60,000 feet. which totals 2,624,765. it leaves a little bit in the bank. a small amount in the bank. in the fall and on october 17th you will get your 875,000 replenishment giving you a total of 1,142,000 square feet. at that point, we expect another chunk of projects will come forward. there's a number of projects in the cue. i don't know what order they will come in and i don't know exactly which onc ones they're coming in. they're being asked to phase. >> you feel comfortable?

it's safe to assume you feel comfortable that the phasing plus the timing is going to allow a lot of projects to move forward? >> i think it does. particularly because we know that the port will come in after probably in second quarter next year and then they'll pull the bank negative and the following year after that there won't be any allocation available because it will be replen issued i reple fall and the port will have taken everything left in the bank. in the fall of 2021 you get another allocation and you end up with $810,000 in the bank and the next round of projects will come in front of you and some of the second phases and other projects and so basically by looking at the way the port comes through taking the bank negative but ronenish particular allows you to allocate the remaining -- can you talk about

the rational for that and why we're taking it in that much in this first allocation. >> there's a couple of key points. one is that we are requiring that the killroy keep the option open for the flower vendors to return to sixth and brandon. until we can find a permanent home for the flower vendors, we want to make sure they can always return to sixth and brandon if it has their election. that's one of the key points. the other key point is that on the timing of it, as soon as kill roy gets his final approval, they will begin construction on the temporary

site at 2,000 marin. so the developers will be responsible for clearing that site and preparing an interim market and as soon as that market so whether or not they come back, we still have the timeframe in which they need to bneed tobe at an interim locati. >> and the d.a., which will come to us and thank you for the detail on that. it's between the city and kill roy. is the flower market a party to that? >> the flower mart is not a party to the development agreement. that's the city and kill roy. the flower vendors have what is called a try-party agreement with kill roy and the development agreement will reference the tri-party agreement. we're working closely with the

flower market to make sure that we understand exactly what they need in a permanent location so we can come up with the formula that will allow them to pay for the permanent location if it's located elsewhere. >> so the city has seen it between two? >> the tri-party agreement is between who? >> it's not -- the city is not a part of the tri-party agreement. it's the kill roy and the market association and the vendors. >> so there's two entities that represent the flower mart. >> ok. >> thank you. >> and then, a question came up in our last hearings on these program allocations, i imagine that the d.a. will address this but the timing of the public benefits. how is that addressed in the d.a. if there's an initial allocation and an allocation how are the public benefits being timed? >> all the benefits in this project come with the first allocation in the first phase

and so to give you a sense of what it looks like, the first throw projects in front of you, are all getting about the same percentage of their total allocation in their first phase. actually, 598 brandon got 77% and kill roy 67% and they're all getting roughly the same percentage of their total allocation the first phase. in this project, we have the development agreement that allows us to bring all of the public benefits forward first. so they'll all come in the first phase. >> how is that being addressed with other projects? i know we heard some will lag because of the approvals but how is that controlled? the public benefits? >> in this project? >> no, in others.

>> it's about what the public benefit is. for example, in the land will come online earlier because we have to go through the board and other processes and so the commission's approval lends itself towards getting that. on 598, we were able to get the land early and then the park will come when they get the second construction and maintenance to the park come in the second phase basically. >> thank you. >> i just wanted to clarify that the popos will be phased with the three construction. all the benefits from the d.a. are with the first phase but the popos get built. >> when the building gets built. >> to the project's sponsor, can you just talk about if the

flower mart does go to a different site, can you just walk through what happens to that portion of the project. i know there's a childcare and i guess additional retail but perhaps -- >> perhaps i can answer that. >> can you show that again because i know you were running out of time. >> there's a plan at the end of the presentation there. so essentially what happens is we're able to shrink the footprint that otherwise would go to the flower mart a little bit so that frees up for additional popos widening the market alley and it also allows us to then insert the 23,000 square foot childcare center along the north and fifth street

side. >> and that's up too. it's a purple back on the back-right corner. we're able to get a meeting center, a community room for community meetings and such of almost a thousand square feet over off morris street. >> in the blue areas? >> the blue areas are most of that is still what would be counted as office space or the lobbies to the office space. >> ok. >> all right. >> in just the -- you've got -- there's a significant amount of retail in this project which i think is great. we've had discussions about row tales and there's some who aren't as bullish in the future of retail. maybe can you talk about the types of tenants that you anticipate in those spaces and in kind of your thoughts on of

retail. i like it. we get a little nervous about that amount of retail space seeing some of the trends we're seeing in retail. >> that's a good question. we're seeing some parts of retail sector struggling. in kill roy's other projects, we're having a lot of success with retail tenants. certain types of retail do well. food and beverage retail and that would be the focus of this project. the market hall especially would be a lot of really small vendors that are neighborhood-serving. evoking the european-tile market hall feeling and we're pretty bullish about that part of the retail sector. other parts of the retail sector, clothing, for example, not doing as well and wouldn't see as much of that in this project but there's plenty to go around and especially in this location with all the new development happening, the

neighborhood will need this retail. our project has probably more retail than all the other projects combined and it's needed to serve the new residents and office workers. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioner fung. >> not sure who would answer this but for years the lease with p.u.c., are there options to extend that? >> yes. we've asked for options. >> for how long? >> we've asked for one two-year options. it's still a negotiation that is on going. >> the $170 million, can you provide us with a breakdown for how that is spread out. >> i will include that and

there's a exhibit that breaks down all the fees. i didn't bring the breakdown. it's a great deal that is the jobs housing fee which $160 million many of there's an eastern neighborhoods fee that is $20 million. the transit impact fees are closer to 60 so there's a number of fees and i will definitely include the breakdown >> they come with the formal submission. >> yes. >> ok. >> that seems to be it. >> very good, commissioners. that will place us on item 6 for case 2019-006418pca many of this is a north of market affordable housing vn city wide affordable housing fund planning code and administrative code amendments.

>> good evening, commissioners. veronica flores planning department staff. the item before you is proposed legislation regarding the north of market affordable housing fund. this ordinance is proposed by mayor breed and amy chan from the mayor's office of housing and community development is in attendance today and also available to answer any questions. the ordinance seeks to abolish the north of market affordable housing fund and have these fees deposited to and administered by the city wide affordable housing fund which is consistent where all the other affordable housing fees are listed. the north of market housing fund was established circa 1985 to stabilize, rehabilitate and retain affordable housing in the north of market residential special use