Several more speakers. Theyre 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 theres 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. Im excite to be a coresponse or and look forward to seeing this project completed. One of the components that im most excited about and why i coauthored the legislation is the amount of Affordable Housing and middle Income Housing thats 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. Im 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 thats 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. Were 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. Im 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. Its taken us a while to get to this point, and i just cant 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 wasnt 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, were going to keep to that commitment. So im 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 longterm project that child care will not only be considered but actually built. So i want to submit to i dont know who i submit this to, but i received a letter from the Giants Organization to reenforce 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. Were happy to take that, madam, president , for the file. Again, im glad that the Giants Organization stepped up under commitment and im 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 im 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 im 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 CoastalCommission 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. Im 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 dont know if im overlooking, but i was wondering if theres 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 thats it. Thank you. Seeing no names on the roster, we can begin the presentation. Thank you. Im with the port of San Francisco to drill down into a microscope into one aspect of the project that under state law were required to speak to you about and has a separate action and thats 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 were 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 citys fiscal agent to direct the citys 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 45year 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 were available to you for questions. Supervisor kim. Thank you. I just want to ask the same question that i asked last week. I think its 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 thats associated with building this new neighborhood. The things that people often dont think about, but the horizontal development, so the sewage, the lights, the grid, the streets, the parks and all of that. So weve seen, you know, of the 30,000 units of housing that we have already entitled, that theyre 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 doesnt fall victim to the same kind of to the same challenges and that well 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 dont want to have the disappointing action occur where were 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 were 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. Weve been very pleased with how quickly that item is coming forward and we have a similar schedule with the giants, if approved today, were 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 its 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 were 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. Its 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 dont want to accept anything thats not up to code and up to standard. Im not saying that we should be accepting streets that dont work for the city, but i just hope that we can do the advanced work so that when the streets are done, were 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. Ive 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 im kind of concerned because i dont see anything that has the transportation commitment. Im wondering how mta plans to mitigate the congestion from this development. Thank you, supervisor cohen. Carly payne. Pardon me. There are im going to give you two parts of an answer to your question. One is about mitigating impacts of congestion and from that im 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 theres 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 doesnt happen. So theres 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 theres 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, im looking for something thats 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 dont 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. Theres 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