Fee for nonresidential and pdr projects filed before july 24th to pay it with the partial rotunda. Supervisor alavos will be leading the discussion. Good it you this is hopefully, the culmination of years of work moving this item out of committee we the item before you amendments made to the Transportation Sustainability fee we made them in december of last year these railroad also an amendment ive attempted to make in the fall of last year before i begin i want to thank the Planning Department and the mta. All of their work developing these new fee structures for Development San Francisco they are significant improvement on the previous tdif and include the retain that had not been impacted but now in the tdif so to make that clear the proposed fee is not near significant to offset the impacts that the developments have on the Transportation Network and the Economic Feasibility study houses shows it sport a higher fee without the feasibility of the projects this ordinance has made two amendments to bring the tdif in line with the fees on the Residential Projects the first part of this ordinance with the amended changes to charge the nonresidential Square Footage over 99 thousand nine hundred plows square feet so to raise it under 2 to 21. 04 currently at 1804 weve approved the new tsf for the residential units 21 units to 99 units the fees is he over 7 increasing on the residential unit one and above 8. 74 13 percent higher and the nonresidential currently is 8 from 8 hundred to 99 thousand plus square feet is 1804 cents were proposing the new one here is going to be a dollar more for anything over one hundred feet 9 plus the residential represents o represents a higher significance of fee compared to nonresidential the nexus study show see the developments adjudicate 3 times the impacts of our Transportation System as Residential Developments generate the planning staff saw the feasibility combined with supervisor yees childcare impact fee and found the two portals are over one hundred square foot will be feasible the impact on the residual land use of 86 combined with the childcare fee will only be negative 7 percent on the two commercial protocols that is less than what the would make a project financially unfeasible this is still as i said weigh blots threshold on november 3rd the board of supervisors rejected any proposal to the nonresidential tsf nonresidential it westernly trying to make a 50 percent increase to 54 now the nonresidential footage we tried to raise it on november 3rd up that was not sports the amendments the item before you is only a 2 increase by 2 the responsibility on our nonresidential develops and generate 2 million a year in addition revenue awhile still remaining with the projects to be financial feasibility weigh blow the thresholds the Second Amendment in this legislation is for nonResidential Projects that was submitted an application before july 21st, 2015, but not received final approval shall pay the difference of 50 percent between the tsf and the tdif this is will mirror the grairthd of the Residential Projects and making nonresidential tsf policies k3467b9 with residential policies and of course this make sense we know that nonresidential buildings have a 3 times greater impact ann as residential buildings colleagues the item before you and i urge your support altogether the projects that will be affected grandfathered in will be 30 million an additional one time funding for your transportation given the t thirty process that was identified over thirty billions it make sense we comfortable together every dollar for the Transportation Services the city thank you, colleagues thank you very much supervisor wiener. You thank you very much madam chair thank you supervisor avalos for acknowledging that the Transportation Sustainability fee we passed last november was the culmination of many years of work as you recall the precursor was transit fee was passed 35 years ago with a blanket exception for residential, commercial has been paying the transit impact fees for 35 years last year november for the First Time Ever we after years and years of work and after a previous related effort fell apart at the board of supervisors three years ago almost 4 years ago we were able to move through the board of supervisors and extension of the transit impact fees to residential so Residential Development is now First Time Ever paying transit fees not just projects that are big enough with an agreement we negotiated this is a big, big win and in addition to not paying the impact fees that ordinance increased what commercial Pace Commercial development pays versus under the impact fees so it was passed increased and in fact, it increased it the legislation that was introduced and then in committee as chair cohen recalls we increased it on commercial by enabling it another dollar per square feet with it was originally introduced tsf and the Residential Developers were not happy they especially\fight us on it we passed that ordinance after years and years of work and the mayor as i understand it into law. New system that is significantly increasing transit sxheekz for commercial and for residential i dont know why we need to going to the well and say well it is not good enough lets take on a few more dollars we can tackle more impact fees and every good enough as someone that fought very, very hard sometimes winning and sometimes losing to increase the funding for Public Transportation is not the way to do legislation the board passed this legislation and rejected the identical amendment and let this ordinance work and, in fact, it is already working ill nobody be supporting this ordinance today, i think we need to look at different ways to fund transit and not looking to one source probation officer make sure this is broad basis funding for transportation this is frankly sometimes lacking building thank you very much thank you supervisor peskin. Thank you, madam chair and supervisors its been i feel like a rip van win he will moment in the board on the 2009 sustainability fees as indicated was for commercial Development One time capital and by way of operating money the c3 that area grow over time encompasses the waterfront and move forward south and supervisor wiener indicated some years ago was extended to Residential Development i was there and one of the votes on the board to bring back that fee at the time that was not updated in many, many years in alignment with the proper rates at the dawn of the 21st century some 1 or 16 years ago and there is no question but that these costs need to be these fees need to be upgraded i enjoyed the nexus study and the Economic Feasibility study and respectfully part company with supervisor wiener having read the findings and i actually think over the course this think an balancing act you have to great competing the housing on the one hand and keeping on the transportation side on the other other and finding the swop is our goal but interested in reading this i think those fees should are been updated at the beginning of this boom and not waiting until 2015 but noirnl will have the at least impact from the transportation of sustainability fee the residential cost burden to the due do the imposition of the tsf is equality to the costs of one to two percent depending on the cost of construction the neighborhoods where the bulk happens this will not impact the overall faent or the housing a lot of further analysis but predicated on a fundamental change the way the city undertakes the evaluation of transportation l o s level of service and easily reduces the in the amount of and the costs the fundamental studies and predicated on that if you look at did rages so forth the Feasibility Study at 100 percent or one and 25 or one and 50 percent i have to say that with all due respect i think we could realize for money for the capital and sequester operating i noticed in reading all the material and in discussions with folks is that the transit impact fee could be spent on capital and on praits costs as compared to the p. S. F only on capital i maybe missing something but like to revisit and see if we can semester the possibility of putting praits costs back in so it will be same thing the tdif can be spent on operating i have a number of amendments colleagues that id like to offer to the tsf legislation but for one think that the extra 2 for projects over one thousand square feet are sustainable is financially not stop housing thats been expressed in the Economic Feasibility study and quite frankly that was done in 2012 with the discussion began and i realize a lot of work has been done by any colleagues and the legislatively branch and the other agencies but well have that 30 million youve seen in our pocket now. Thank you. Thank you supervisor avalos. Thank you well, this is actually, i worked on multiple methods of raising money for muni this is not the only way im trying to raise money for money as supervisor wiener indicated and ill again echo my comments and, of course, supervisor peskin comments these fees we fell short of the kleenex of those fees based on the analysis from the Planning Department and, yes the city has been working many, many years on tsf and it only was last year, i got involved with that process and thank my staff member jerry but to the Planning Commission and talking about raising the fee levels and the Planning Commission voted to race that when it came before the board of supervisors we didnt raise the levels until it was discussed but when it come forward weve settled on American People arbitrary number well below for the fees it is an arrest warranty number and in agreement 200 with developers and with the supervisors i think it is important we use our Committee Structure to legislate and make improvements onramp legislation when it comes before use it is not tied up when it gets to the board of supervisors i want to insure we get ever dollar of funding we have not yielded done so weve left money on the table and colleagues, i want to make sure we have this major bite at apple before it is and hopefully well a approve that after Public Comment and i support the contemplate from supervisor peskin and have that votes on at the full board weve not experiences from full development from the Transportation System supervisor wiener. Thank you. I want to agree with one comment supervisor peskin made years ago we in 2012 attempted to not do everything that tsf did but a number of things to expand the scope when we does the refresher understanding with the replacement and this is not supervisor peskin was not a member of the board but it fell apart because it was found challenges that we had and it felt apart so we ended up moving forward essentially without any kind of significant change we had a little opportunity in 2012 but there was not the support moving forward to do that we tried. Lets go to Public Comment. Through the chair or to the City Attorney or answer do you know why the operating dollars came out. I think the thinking was when you look at sorry through the chair when you look at transit impact fees they are one time fees they are incredibly sickle well go through years where we have sxheents the revision and years it is just a butch crop because of the exclusion the last few years when you have a source that is that incredibly volatile it make sense to use it for one time like capital i think we look at the capital it is expansive a huge gray area and capital in terms of the state of repair it is not strip active some people think of a good state of repair rehabilitating vehicles etc. I think that thinking and i know there is people that want to see what is really one time up and down that can set you that for flurry know you know this is the thinking behind it thank you. All right. Thank you ladies and gentlemen, lets go to Public Comment i have 3 speaker cards any other member of the public want to speak as a reminder well have to minutes peter. On behalf of the transit riders first thank you to the committee for all that we appreciate that but i do urge that you adopt the revised ordinance before you when tdif was passed it so you get to recovery 50 percent level of the associated costs over the years that amount has varied it has not dropped blow 25 percent supervisor wieners correct the absolute number rose in the tsf that was identified the nexus study and that happened but the percentage that was recovered is smaller than before it started out 21 and first when it came to the committee now 22 maybe and a half percent but the proposed amendments raise it to 23 something is it so still sort of 25 but very much support this and this is remaining the lost percentage of recovery weve as put before the commercial factor, and, secondly, the slide i support the opening of the two flexible funds this is a slide prepared by the sfmta with the equality strategy is it shows applies to any project that is solving projecting problems is a threelegged stool you can build by Capital Projects and solve some problems by managing the resources better but some problems can only be solved by adding this is true as the city grows so we realize this is a source of equality but the agency should have the flexibility to use its resources in developing this venture thank you. Ms. Deedee workman. Good afternoon dede with the chamber of commerce the chamber have worked on the tsf proposals o proposals and the initial proposal we worked in 2012 to stop the contribution quite frankly with respect working with a Large Coalition of nonprofit groups that saw the stipulations was to burn some that measure failed and continued to work with supervisor wiener and others to revamp the tdif to find the the tsf we could agree, too, we worked together in good faith to cup that you with the numbers that could work and those numbers were accounted right here in this chamber and that was not then two months ago and now this comes back with no notice, no discussion no contention the fees should be raised we feel strongly that the fees were worked out in good faith with the supervisors and our stakeholders are the right fee the rights fee levels we dont understand why it comes back and dont agree with the proposed increase for the nonresidential construction and we urge you to reject it thank you. Thank you. Family madam chair i dont know the history that mr. Workingman is speaking to because this is a fee notice it was published two weeks ago so quite a bit of notice and as a matter of fact that came up at my first meeting on december 8th this is why that appears so two months ago of notice and relative to the speakers comments i dont know what was worked out in this room i was here on december 8th when we adopted the previous matter but the study in the spring of last year almost a year ago is exactly where those numbers come out of they dont come out of any negotiation with the boards their so forth on page 5 of the circle study and the case pdr at 7 61 is the legislation and the 1 he and 25 tsf at dollars per square feet for the residential is precisely the study and 18. 04 was the circle study i have no idea what youre talking about. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon tom executive director of liveable city to speech in favor it is an incredible important times for Public Transportation is creates value for Property Owners weve involved billion dollars and created billions of and billions of dollars and capturing to sustain the extra we have and build the extra necessary to accommodate it growth is for this is a balanced sustainable so supervisor avalos for bringing this forward just a thought on the capitals versus praits i would say i think that the Capital Investments we have the oil tsf most spent for operation as a result weve made few investments in capital and then we didnt build any capacity to accommodate the growth in riderships if youve ridden bart or muni or any other mod of transportation you know were pga people over we have such jam packed trains one of the ideas behind tdif youll need to expand physically the capacity of that Transit System to accommodate the additional rider weve not going done that since 1970s it is time we did that it will add disciplinarian the capital but it is hard to cut in other words, to sustain the operations but theyre incredibly important to the system and the other thing if you neglect capital youve spend more and more time and energy trying to sustain the equipment beyond its uses thank you very much. Calvin transfor justice he speak in favor raising the office fee and with a greatest flexibility two reasons one first on raising the fee the fee is the nexus study fee the nexus study it is important to understand take into account the great mask change, if you will, technology of commercial Office Buildings under the old tdif for those of us around in those days when muni buses barley beat the dinosaurs the assumption was there was one Office Worker for every 5 hundred square feet of commercial be Office Building the days of cub he lives and days of computer when the tip writers took place a lot of space were looking at a level of density in the office daytime population of about one worker per