Do so we know that San Francisco has added and will continue to add tens of thousands of jobs and housing over the next decade and we needed to be able to fund the transportation infrastructure to meet the demand by this growth our city impact fees was and is innovative funding mechanism to pay for transit with nonresidential developers contributing to the muni system for years we think that make sense to have market rate Housing Developers pay their fair share this Transportation Sustainability fee brings also in regional operates and caltrain where ridership is sorry region operators like bart and caltrans our county wide Transportation Plan as well as the Mayors Task Force identified the need for billions of of investment in Maintenance Management and expansion of our Transportation System the t s f is one piece of a larger piece but critical building on prop a and prop a and helping seek the voter approvals next year and with the declining state and federal funding we need to invest in our Transportation Needs it again and like to reiterate our support for this item thank you. Thank you without further ado, this is the woman of the hour. Good afternoon, supervisors alicia with the San Francisco muni we have a brief presentation about the fee and provide context for this proposal that i think our directors have provided quite a bit of the background and context ill go through this quickly obviously with your well aware were experiencing tremendous growth and accepting hundred thousand new households and hundred the house new jobs by 2014 our 3 agencies the paradox a and Municipal Transportation Agency have worked to put together a comprehensive we think of our strategies towards managing new Development Impacts on the Transportation System and derive the Sustainability Program from that work it has 3 convenes as john referenced it there a piece that changes how to impacts the system from new development under the California Environmental quality act a piece that will encourage new development and minimize effects on the Transportation System and then a third component the focus of discussion an approval that is in front of you which is levenlg Additional Resources to more fully invest in the system to accommodate growth as ed referenced weve been working collectively over the past years to generate more revenue for the Transportation System one of the important piece that come out of the work of the marries task force was an entire to prioritize the revenue amongst the existing population through the voters on things such maintaining a system of care of vehicles additional skiing efficiency out of the existing system the Fund Proposed through ballot measures are typically oriented targeted in their uses we have fewer Funding Sources in the avenue of adding capacity to our Transportation System so youre feeling was that taking another look at the impact fees for transit and transportation mating made make sense it allows our Development Partners to contribute a fair share to the upkeep and expansion of the Transportation System so the fee itself that is in front of you a citywide knee that replies the Transit Development fee that encourage applies to nonresidential use with the expansion of nonresidential to as well as to institutions no change in the sfpuc for the nonprofit and the determining how how to set the rates for your consideration staff engaged consults one a nexus study that looks at what it quantified the impact of new development on the Transportation System in a cost the city will bear in order to mitigate those effects and look at the feasibility analyze it showed how much fees could be charged without pushing development it a a points essential not having sufficient revenue in order to move forward we tried to strike a careful balance between the amount of this meeting will now come investment we could gain from the source with also putting to order forward a project that the Development County could this is the regular meeting the accommodate without compacting the development with those two Land Use Commission im chair and to my right is supervisor factors in mind the proposal is wiener the vice chair and to my left supervisor kim and victor a new residential fee of 774 per young it our clerk and thank you square feet and a non1804 and leo and herb from sfgovtv for the production repair 7 61 note broadcasting this mr. Clerk, any in are parts of city we have announcements . Yes. Area plans that have been completed speaker cards and adopted through this board the documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. Items acted upon today will projects are paying an impact appear on the october 6, 2015, fee of a component they fund transit or transportation locally as proposed today, the bobs agenda oracles. A call item one. Ordinance will exempt projects is the regulation for the freeway operation with the state from the transportation consultant of the area plan fees of california permitting theyll pay the entire maintenance responsibility for transportation fee but ref a hoig 101 and the director ever receiving a credit for the fee of the impact fees in the public works to accept the agreement. Planner ladies and gentlemen, so this item number one is in terms of applicability this supported before i the sfmta i politics to nonresidential and believe we have both mta and dpw applies on. Can i ask a question. Staff with us today deanna from thank you for all your work dpw and mr. Paul from mta over the years i just in terms of a couple of things to touch lets see im not sure who will on first with the Fee Structure and be speaking first mta please come on up thank you the Feasibility Analysis can you for joining us today. Just describe in more detail how good afternoon, supervisors im deanna im with the san the department determined whats feasible and not feasible because i feel like the debate francisco public works ca. Can you please hold the mike is in a vacuum how own e people color. Say no, it should be higher or peter is the project manager with the mta corridor the kill the development if it goes proposed resolution for the higher i want to understand it authorization to enter into a is important for the public to freeway maintenance operation understand what the feasibility with caltrans and the maintenance for the brt to be assessment is in terms of this fee and the other fees the krukd o constructed along Route Development pays and the second question is with the area plans 101 theyll be responsible for exception so it is if youre in the bugs lanes and platforms and landscaping and shown on exhibit say the market octavia area e. R. A the remaining lanes will ooermentz youre paying a continue to be maintained by transportation fee you will now caltrans sidewalks are are the citys responsibility under the pay the t s p and have our area fee reduced how about that will 2009 delegated agreement thats the summary of play against what for example, agreements. All right. Thank you those area plan impact fees will often be finding on improvements sir, i want to add anything. In that area so weve used i think deanna has market octavia fees to pay for safety in upper market and the t summarized the agreement fairly well that is part of our process s p is a improvement fee those of getting caltrain buy off on are my two easy questions. Sure so ill take the area the project to show weve defined how to maintain the road plan knee question first, i have a slide if i can get that again and their giving up two lanes which shows the calculation of market octavia so youll see the dedicated for transit project in the market octavia rightofway. My colleagues and i does plan pays the 774 for the have comments Public Comment on Transportation Sustainability fee that current the knee on number one. I left hand since 1977 many xhoovk market octavia is 10 theres bus but the portion is years 6 or seven years i go to reduced from the market octavia fee so the project no total pace San Francisco through the golden gate and all and all a beautiful 1666 thats the actual calculation as it is proposed freeway the 101 from areas for the ordinance today, the consideration around the in of petaluma and, etc. On the south way the fee will pull down had a lot to do with our understanding side some say i also take the the Transportation System two 101 basically to the buddhist parts our understanding the Transportation System as a really a global system it is temple and the freeway have a extremely difficult in not connection in San Francisco as you may know it is a detour and impossible to make certain types of transportation and limit that to a Geographic Area the classic continued to San Francisco from north i mean most people go to example a new muni bus from one end of the city to its route slausen a lot of people freeway i mean so much construction with that consideration we emphasized the citywide maintaining to put there in the investment to a greater degree beautiful freeway a beautiful the other components oftentimes freeway besides that. The transit component of the all right. Thank you mr. Investment that have been called for in the planned areas with or yip is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak seeing none, Public Comment is are significantly cost and the closed colleagues an information motion for this item thank you funds generated from the impact fees in the plan areas are motion by supervisor kim to with insufficient on air own to cover a positive recommendation and this that is an unanimous those costs the reality is were decision this motion moves having to pull from different places to make those investments forward mr. Clerk, call item and also were prioritizing number 2. Item number 2 an issuance where the need is greatest so we felt that the needs for amending the planning code by the Transportation Sustainability fee for the investment where it is happening application of the existing is skfthd i want to clarify in transportation fee for the homeless shelters from the the planned areas a transit fee transportation fee making the as well as a street or street members to the area plan fee in component of the fee that street the building code. Component of the 230e will stay thank you very much in the planned areas a lot of the investments in people in the lets see supervisor wiener anything you, you want to say on neighborhoods really appreciate that they feel it outraging item 2. Tackling as we walk around their thank you very much madam chair this item is an important neighborhood will remain in the awe pies of that neighborhood. Revamp item transformation of i dont have a Strong Enough our approach in San Francisco to either way but im a supporter transit impact fees weve had of trying to take the transit fees for 35 years but it transmitted fees and invest in is limited in its scope it is in the overall systems be obviously on a muni line it never applied to residential and works from one end of the city been broad exemption so we it is or is it doesnt but i know that a very important step forward especially in areas of the city for the funding and Transportation System and is 19 are absorbing more seeking a board look at the developments im well aware of extent to develop should be this issue noting not only the residents that are seeing that assessed fees in support our but we are doing the physical Transportation System the city is growing significantly and we changes so more people will be need to make sure were all walking and more congestion so pitch in to fund transit as we you appreciate that explanation. Sure and then the faebd i hope and expect will grow along with the rest of the growth in our city have a slide we selected 10 this is been a long process prototypes and tried to use real colleagues as you may know in 2012 when we just want the projects a real site to test Transit Development fee we when the feasibility shrewd adapted some changes but the labor day the performances we board overwhelmingly rejected it have to take a mix of small and it is 0 coming to the versus larger verse midsize for forwardlooking form i look forward to discussions a number a grasp on how the fee might of issues that will be addressed and policy decisions im looking impact the projects what it forward to that discussion studied the burden of impact i know that this may continue fees and the existing costs into today, if it is continued i hope that floekz stick around to performa tested the proposed provide testimony because i Transportation Sustainability think that given the importance fee at different amounts the of this legislation and given rates were set in envelope and the controversies around a few then we tested at hundred 25 and aspects of that it is important 2 hundred and 50 percent of that for us to receive alp public rate so the Feasibility Study feedback i look forward to the staff presentation i know there didnt include an analysis of is discussion about the feasibility assume any impact fees that have not been do you whether and to what extent want by the board of supervisors raising the Square Footage fees and there are other fees the i think this is important to board is considering not hear what the methodology with embedded in the Feasibility Study study. For example, we know that the proposal today including the issues burn feasibility and want supervisor yee is interesting angle ordinance to extend the to make sure were square in the Transit System and want to make childcare impact fee to sure that the development is residential i know it is a lower economically feasible taking a fee than this but what is the look at transit fees but inclusionary housing and importance to understand how childcare and all the other that plays into this as well. Ill suggest to look at the important impact fees that are assessed now and in the future total feasibility that was madam chair, i look forward to the discussion. Determined through the city and i want to give supervisor the boards call to allocate the kim a few words. Room and the feasibility to i want to acknowledge the transportation versus childcare Planning Department and the mta and any of the others priorities work on bringing this forward that the board has with respect that is something thats been in discussion for many, many years to this what we have is the cap i look forward to it passing and that came out of this analysis i updated the transportation believe that supervisor yees sustainability fee we know the proposal was 1. 50 if you add current fees are far below what the city should be gathering that in the cap gets lower. From the private projects in order to help to partially okay mitigate the transmissions impact that growth is having on the city were a city that is and. What you went with was growing very quickly especially during this time and we want to hundred and 28 percent make sure that all of our partners that are helping with the reason the rate at which we that growth are also helping to were essentially maximizing the allow us to provide the services and capital and infrastructure revenue for the critical needs to make the improvements that is to invest in the Transportation System without push a project a city that continues to move over the line into the affectionate there is a wide with Public Transit improvements range of affectionate just based and pedestrian and Bicycle Safety improvements i know that there has been a lot on the different characteristics of discussion around the of any project so this was trying to give a marker to where promoted rates im interested in examining over this Land Use Commission and next week when it we felt the fee can be what did we need to raise the fees and you do endirector garcia the im interested in the Planning Commissions recognize of either types. Im open to increase in the up to 33 percent as a nexus or Square Footage amount but i want looking at a gradated fee based month make sure we get it right on either project height or and you know someone at work construction type or by the size of the project i know we have a balance that we knows im trying to get more money but i want to make sure need to make a policy as policy were not doing it in a way that pa makers luke the nexus study will make prongs infeasible you for the impact of supplemented development and making sure we end up less in the affordable are looking at the viability of housing and Everything E