, but the future parcels don't vote yet on the formation of the cfd. >> so, and now i will talk about the plan for both the revenue and the expenditures within the cfd and it will primarily pay for that downtown rail extension that i mentioned, but from the fourth and king, to the new transit center and along with a lot of street and open space improvements, and this is going to supplement the tax fees and revenue and there is a list of eligible capitol projects in the cfd legislation and specifically those items are funding the train box, that dtx extension and the roof top park on the transit center and a lot of public realm improvements to serve the pedestrians coming and the new development and the intention, really is that we do anticipate that there will be a large number of pedestrians coming to this transit terminal and this new development and moving between there and market street and so it is paying for a lot of those public improvements in that area, and the planning department and the department of public works are working on a detailed street scape plan including the det

. >> and so here is a map showing the cfd boundary along with the transbay redevelopment boundary, if you can see the outline in red is the cfd boundary and then, you can see sort of the gray lines within that of the transbay plan, and zone one, which are the public parcels under ocii jurisdiction and it is indicated there, and sort of at the bottom of the plan area and then in zone two, are private parcels under the jurisdiction of the planning department and so within that boundary were rezoned through the center and district plan and they got significant height increases on several parcel and previously they topped out at 550 feet and now, multiple development parcel cans go up to 700 feet or above. and they also removed, the density limits which has allowed more development on parcel and as part of the adoption of the plan and the up zoning, the code was amended to require new impact fees and participation in this melarue district by the new development. and here is a closer out, more detailed view and you can see that the initial parcels, are shaded in there that are, the initial

boundary along with the transbay redevelopment boundary, if you can see the outline in red is the cfd boundary and then, you can see sort of the gray lines within that of the

affordable housing is exempt and child care space for instance. >> and so here is a map showing the cfd boundary along with the transbay redevelopment boundary, if you can see the outline in red is

city and county of san francisco community facilities district no. 2014-1 (transbay transit center) (cfd), and take such other actions as may be necessary or expedient to the formation of the cfd. >> any questions. >> and i appreciate this resolution in favor of rcfd form nation and the action that was taken by board of supervisors two weeks ago and to support that approval and i also want to recognize the mayor's office because i know that the mayor particularly a very strong position and we were able to stick to the original formation and the city will be made whole by the district and so it remains to be seen what will occur in the next couple of months and i want to recognize the leadership for standing strong on making sure that we will be able to receive the funds from our private developers to fund this important work. and are there any other comments or questions? >> seeing none, we will open it up for public comment on this item? >> seeing no public comment, public comment is closed. do we have a motion on this item? >> do we have a motion? >> second. >> and a second. >> so can

so, in an overview of the cfd, but that transit center plan as i mentioned was adopted in 2012, included a requirement that the major new development will be required to join a community facilities district or a special tax district and established the general terms for the rates at 0.55 percent, of the value, and a term of a maximum of 30 years. and i have called for in the implementation document, the city has done a study to develop, a rate and method of a portionment of those taxes or an rm a and based on an updated valuation study performed by the concord group. and that included looking at how the taxes will be assessed on major new development and required by the planning code. and it assumed that the existing development does not pay and that the tax based and the taxes based on land use, consistent with the value is described in the transit center district plan and based on that evaluation performed by the group and the land use category and residential, and looking at those for sale and rental and the office and hotel, retail, and the initial maximum special rates for each prop

involved for approving the resolution, for the formation of the special tax district up holding the cfd tax rates as outlined in the tcpd and it will be unfortunate and disappointing if the developers move forward with any lawsuits that will jeopardize the completing of the transbay, transit center, and the top park and the downtown extension and the improvements and on the second item, regarding the opportunity to revisit the uniform height and level boarding for cal train and high speed rail, i attended the cal train rail panel discussion, in mountain view on september 29th. >> and the panel members, were dave cal train, and ben from high speed rail and brian from the tjpa project team, and thompson from the high speed rail group and jillian the director of the policy of the city and county of san francisco and this panel was moderated by dina, and when i attended that discussion, really reaffirmed that the issue must be and that issue must be studied closely, providing the funders of the high speed rail and mou and the opportunity to collaborate on upcoming decisions. we must maximiz