Director lai thank you. Just curious if any outside agencies or consultants are helping you with the reviewing of the various codes, because thats a pretty big undertaking to take to review . Yeah, what were 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, id 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 im thinking about this, were rolling out and opening new park space before a lot of the structures, the vertical development is going in, so under projectspecific review, that may be triggered. And im 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, its transbay, the rooftop park and the park that is planned to go where the temporary is to go doesnt fall under prop k as well. Director lai thats interesting. I perceive a lot of our open spaces to be somewhat different than transbay rooftop park, because its an elevated, you know, kind of like p3 structure. I think its 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 its 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. Its 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. Lets see what could be similar, and then lets 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 lets get all this information. Well help you to review the codes and alongside the consultants and well put something together. Thank you, mr. Beck. Im glad youre reviewing both codes. Well have the time in september to make a decision based on those evaluations and well have that discussion at that time. Im 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 its really important, weve 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 theyre 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 . Were 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 FranciscoPlanning 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. Id 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 cant find a seat, you cant remain in the room. Thank you. Okay. Good afternoon and welcome back to the San FranciscoPlanning Commission regular hearing for june 13th, 2019. I will remind members of the public the commission does not tolerate disruption or alberts 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. Im here to introduce informational item 4610698 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 offsite 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 sponsors presentation, i would like to introduce and from the Mayors 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, weve 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 squarefoot offsite land dedication to the Mayors 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 offsite 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 squarefoot 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 projects 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