Carolinas and Electronic Devices and documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. Thank you. Could you call items 14. Item 4, resolution adopting findings under the california Environment Quality act and its guidelines including the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and a statement of overriding considerations, in connection with the development of the Golden State Warriors event center and mixeduse development at miss bay south blocks 29 to 3 and Mission Bay South redevelopment plan. Item 2, ordinance amending the administrative code to establish a fund to pay for the City Services and Capital Improvements addressing transportation and other needs of the community in connection with the events at the Golden State Warriors event center and mixeduse project. Item 3, ordinance delegating to the director of public works the authority to accept required public improvements related to the development of the Golden State Warriors event center and mixeduse Development Pursuant to the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan. And item 4, ordinance ordering the summery vacation of four easements for water line, sanitary sewer and or stormwater purpose and two offers of dedication for the portions of assessors black no. 8722, lot nos. 1 and 8 within the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan for the Golden State Warriors event center and mixeduse development of Mission Bay South blocks 2932. Thank you madame clerk and thank you everyone for beinging here and normally we meet on wednesdays because of timing concerns and veterans day falls this wednesday we will not be meeting this wednesday. So i want to thank everyone for coming here and were here to consider a number of items related to the proposed Golden State Warrior project and look forward to getting moving. I would like to call mr. Vander water to speak on the items. Thank you, good afternoon. Supervisors. Chair farrell, madam vander water in the office of workforce development. We have four items for your consideration. First adoption of ceqa monitoring requirements at the ocii commission and board and you Planning Commission. So we dont have a separate presentation prepared for that. I will walk you through the creation of the mission Bay TransportationImprovement Fund, and then Barbara Moyer from the mission bay task force will wrap up with items 3 and 4. Before i do that i wanted to give the project sponsor an opportunity to say a few words and invite rick welts, president and chief operating officer of the warriors good afternoon, supervisors im president and chief operating officer of the Golden State Warriors and honored to be in front you today. Since we piveted the mission bay a yearandahalf ago we had over 60 Community Meetings including 11 meetings with the mission bay cac, and numerous meetings with the dog patch potrero and south bay neighborhoods, the ucsf, and obviously the mission bay Biotech Community. Through this process im pleased to say that our support has been just nothing short of incredible. This is best evidenced by the overwhelming turnouts we had last week in the unanimous votes at ocii, planning and mta. Along with that strong support from the first day, we started this project, we also heard time and time again concerns from the community, and especially from ucsf about transportation in the neighborhood. We feel like we have gone a long way to addressing those concerns through our recent agreement with the ucsf negotiated by Chancellors Office and barb french. That addresses hospital and local access and includes capping of events when the giants are also playing. The ordinance before you is last most critical piece of this puzzle, the means to ensure there is ongoing funding for the Transportation Services that will be there for the entire neighborhood. The warriors are in strong support for this measure. We urge to you move it forward, thank you. Thank you, mr. Welts. The clerk mentioned the use of the four action items before you. I think the most substantive item is item 2, the ordinance establishing the fund, and well spend the bulk of our presentation walking through its mechanics. Before we do so, as mr. Welts mentioned we have been having this conversation for about 18 months in the community, since the warrior moved to mission bay and for contextsetting its sites 29 through 32 in Mission Bay Redevelopment project area, Mission Bay South, excuse me. Which they purchased privately from sales force, and that transaction just completed a number of weeks ago. It is a 100 privately funded site acquisition, and construction. There is no city funding within the curb of the site. Onsite at the proposal is for 18,000seat arena. About 580,000 gross square feet of office, and up to 125 gross square feet of retail. Its entirely within the mission bay height limits of 160. There are 950 parking stalls onsite, and as part of the purchase, acquired the rights to 132 spaces across the street at 450 south street. This is an existing garage to the north of the site plan. And there are 3. 2 acres of onsite open space, most notably 1acre plaza off the 3rd street which will be the primary entry from transit and 3rd. This gives you a sense of the level of activity we anticipate at the arena, in addition, to the 41 regular home season games, the tallest bar there, and up to 3 preseason games and of course, nba finals every year in San Francisco. We have a number of concerts, other rentals, family shows, and other events at the arena. The capacity again of 18,000 will likely be realized during some of those peak events, the center stage configuration concerts, and postseason games. But due to the nature of the smaller events, the convention events, the theater events and disney on ice type of family shows the average attendance is 9300 as projected by the eir. A couple of quick visuals. A view of the midrise Office Towers seen from 3rd and south street. This will be the primary site from the new expanded platform, from the t3, the primary access from transit. You walk into the site from the northwest corner. You will come diagonally into that oneacre plaza about the same size as the elevated portion of the union square. And into your first real view of the arena in the distance and the primary entrance. If you recall from the site design you can go around the perimeter to the Terry Francois side of the water. We had a lot of time in the mission bay and in the community, we have met with a number of primary stakeholders, and that included the neighborhoods, the businesses, the hospital, some of the advocacy organizations and that culminated just last month with a number of very critical endorsements. One on october 6th the official endorsement there the university of california, San Francisco mission bay and later that week unanimous approval of the design from the mission bay citizens Advisory Committee. And october 20th, a letter from the Life SciencesCommunity Officially endorsing the project as well. We then went into a series of approvals. Unanimously certificated by the office of Community Investment and infrastructure and the sfmta board. Last thursday the Planning Commission unanimously approved the sign view and ceqa findings and mmrp that is before you today. Just before we get into the financials, a big topic in the community is transportation. There is a number of very highprofile transportation improvements that you are not doubt aware of, completion of the central subway, the next phase of the t3rd and fillmore transit priority project, a preferential street on 16th street, electrification of caltrain and ferry ferminal expansion and multibillion dollar investments coming to San Francisco irrespective of the project proposal. Sitting on top of that are a number of specific improvements to the site. So once the arena is open for business, we will be decreasing the headways, the time between trains on the tthird and adding longer trains. Its currently onecar trains and if you have experience going to the meetings, the great doortodoor service from city hall, but not on a real regular frequency and well be addressing that as part of this. Purchasing seimens lightrail vehicles, allowing them to go to 2car train and much higher frequency. Were also adding special event shuttles on 16th street into the Regional Transit commencings at transbay and terminal building and van ness brt and regional collections and working with our regional partners at bart, at weta, golden gate and caltrain and sam trains. There is a variance in the project to create a new center platform. So when you go to the giants game and go to the central boarding platform, which has the advantage of being both longer and wider and serving both trains in either direction. In addition to transit supply, we have a lot of traffic management. These stars on the map show proposed locations for parking control officers, the mta uniforms that are flushing traffic in the peak directions. There are a couple of colors that may not show well on the screen, including those we analyzed in the eir and those added and a couple of critical ones to the conversations with the neighborhood and hospital to separate destinations. So if you are coming to the arena and looking for parking, you do so on the arterial streets like mariposa and 16th and do not interrupt the traffic along the hospital and well be diverting the traffic to do that. There is also an onsite management center, much like at at t park with closed circuit tv and contacts to deploy as necessary if we get an event that draws from one direction geographically more than another and we can shift accordingly. So now into the financials. There is two elements to any financials, one is the onetime upfront capital costs and the other is the operating. On the capital side, were proposing to purchase four of the lightrail vehicles, to install crassover crossover tracks allowing downstream accessibility to expand the platform as we described and augment powers to train can idle preand post events, including when there is an event at at t park. Installing signals, changeable Message Signs and closed Circuit Court tvs and upgrating the network. The total cost is over 55 million in 2014 dollars, just so were consistent with all of our sources and uses. And our projections have onetime projectgenerated sources of about 25. 4 million from the Real Property tax transfer tax that our assessor received and constructionrelated taxes leaving a balance just shy of 30 million that were in active discussions with the Controllers Office to figure out how to finance those costs. On the onetime side, on the sources side, we contracted with economic and Planning Systems, the same consultant who did the fiscal feasibility for the original site at piers 3031 and updated for mission day and instructed them to be accurate, but conservative in their estimates. By that, i mean, if there is a range of revenues, on any of these particular line items, choose the lower end and be conservative about what you think the project will generate . We also then had Keyser Marston review these and shed made sure our budget analyst was heavily involved. The result of that was 14. 1 million as shown in line item here. On the uses side, taking the 14. 1 and break it down into Component Parts there is an element mandated by the ad min code and voters to go to dedicated and restrict sources, the tax measures total 2. 9 million. Operating costs are largely transportation as you saw with transportation augments and traffic management, the parking control officers, totals about 6. 1. Of the 6. 1, 5. 1 million is dedicated to the sfmta just less than a million is for the Sf Police Department for added foot patrols in the neighborhood surrounding the site, not onsite. And some extra funds for the department of public works for Street Cleaning Services in the neighborhood. The warriors pay into the mission Bay Management corporation. And to mission bay parks, that maintain the streets, sidewalks and parks in the neighborhood. This is sort of an added backstop measure during events, to make sure that there are no neighborhood impacts as people leave the site. We mentioned the 55 million in onetime capital needs. The delta that we would look to finance results in an annual payment of 2. 7 million to cover those capital costs. And that leaves two items. One is a dual event fund and all of our conversations in the neighborhood with the hospital, with the Biotech Community, a lot of concern was transportation, and specifically peak condition transportation. So what happens when there is a playoff game at one of the sites and a concert at the other . Or there is a lot of activity in the neighborhood and keep in mind, baseball and basketball are very complimentary, that world series just completed and nba season just began, so there is very little overlap between the two. In those conditions we have created a dual event fund that makes additional Funds Available to the director of transportation, who is here today, to put into service extra transit, extra parking control, other services to make sure that the flow of traffic gets to where it needs to go. And well talk in a minute about the administration of those funds. That leaves a remaining balance of the 14. 1 of 1. 5 million. We have language in the Transportation Improvement Fund that if conditions even despite all of our efforts in the project description with the Million Dollar dual event reserve result in significant delay and we measure a couple of routes from the neighborhood out to the regional collections up 16th, down 3rd, up to the bridge. If that gets to be a significant delay, there can be access to these funds. Our hope is that we never reach that point, and if so, then we would be generating 2. 9 million to our dedicated and restricted city funds and another 1. 5 million to the remaining balance for a total of 4. 4 per year. These are all funds that do not exist today that are all generated by the arena. And this would create a condition where we would put those funds into a controllers reserve account. Its still subject to annual appropriations by the board. We do not have a Development Agreement or chartermandate, so its subject to the annual appropriations, but its a clear signaling of our intentions to fully fund all of the services to serve this arena in a way that does not deprive service elsewhere in the city. It was very important that we had enough parking control officers to serve the site bringing people off of their existing beats. Subject to a maximum annual deposit. So the fiscal Feasibility Analysis is our estimate for today, but in the year of first operation, and at least every five years thereafter, or more if determined necessary by the controller, the Controllers Office would estimate that maximum fund, take 90 of that and put it into this controllers reserve. So 10 again available for discretionary general fund use. And then create this 1 million dual event reserve. There is built in public review and accountability, if in a future year, a future mayor, or board of supervisors, appropriates less than the amount required to fully fund these services, it triggers a series of public hearings. So that we make that very transparent. We recognize there could be conditions where economics dictate a change of policy direction, but we, absent any of those changes want to make sure those funds are fully ascribed in the controllers reserve. As part of the fund that creates a fivemember Advisory Committee. To advise the board the mta, the public works department, the Police Department, and other decisionmakers on the use of monies in the fund this. Is both annual budget request, as well as uses of that 1 million dual event reserve. Those five representatives include designee from the Golden State Warriors owner, a designee from the sucf and one a resident from the dog patch potrero neighborhood and the other is a business from the mission bay dog patch, potrero and one if not all have to be members of the transportation coordination committee, an existing committee that grew out of the creation of at t park. And has been serving for the last 15 years or so as the central body for coordination of events and has membership from the public, private, resident interests of the neighborhood and the 5th street is a representative of the district supervisor. So these five representatives would make recommendations to the mta on the use of the funds and doing this in full transparency in a way that could we both serving events at the event, but protecting the interests of the hospital, the Biotech Community and the neighborhood. With that i would turn it over to barbara and were happy to take questions and comments thank you, mr. Vander water. Good afternoon, supervisors, im barbara moy with the department of public works. What you have before you is first a request to delegate authority for the acceptance of Public Infrastructure to the director of public works, as well as a delegation of authority to accept easements, offers of easements and dedications to the director of the department of real estate. Very straightforward. To give you some background, in 1998 the board of supervisors adopted the Mission Bay Redevelopment plan, and Mission Bay Subdivision code. The Redevelopment Agency entered into an owner participation agreement which outlined Master Developers obligations to build Public Infrastructure and that they would dedicate the Public Infrastructure and land for acceptance bit board of supervisors for the city operation and maintenance. Public infrastructure includes lights, underground utilities, et cetera to Service Private development. The configuration for the land foyer mission bay was established in 1998 by the board when it approved the final transfer map, including blocks 29 through 32, which is the actual area that we have in question right now. The project is located within the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan, and is bounded by 3rd street, south street, Terry Francois boulevard and 16th street. As discussed about mr. Vander water, ocii certified the sf eir and public works has adopted findings. The developer [sphaeupbtd ] application for the tentative map for the project in march of 2015. The application is being processed in accordance with the Mission Bay Subdivision code. After action on tentative final map the board of supervisors will be asked to approve a final map, public improvement agreement. After approval of the street improvement permit, the public works will inspect the work to ensure that the work is in compliance with the improvement plans and specifications in it and if appropriate, determine that the project is complete. The final step is accept the Public Infrastructure by the board of supervisors. The request today is to delegate the acceptance of the Public Infrastructure to the director of public works and grant the director of property the authority upon director of public works determination of completion to accept, record grant deeds and easements. Id be happy to address any questions that you might have. Thank you very much. Colleagues any questions at this time . Much appreciated. Mr. Vander water, why dont we go to our budget Analyst Report first. Mr. Rose. Yes, mr. Chairman and members of the committee, on page 7 of our report, we note that the sfmtas estimated cost of purchase four new lightrail vehicles and make other transportation improvements to accommodate the warriors projects has been state 55. 3 million. Estimated revenues generated by the warriors 25. 4 million, previously stated revenue shortfall that is shown in table 2 on page 8 of our report. According to the sfmta, the estimated revenue shortfall of that 29. 9 million for the transit improvements for the warriors project will be financed through the sale of sfmta Revenue Bonds or other sources and annual debt service projected to be paid by Revenue Generation from the warriors project, shown on page 9 of the report. The sfmta expenditures for Transit Services to the project will be paid by fare and parking revenues generated by these services, and the mission Bay TransportationImprovement Fund will pay for sfmta service to the warriors project not covered by the fare and parking revenues and the sfpd, the Police Department city departments estimated annual expenditures to provide services to the warriors project are 10. 1 million and will be fund by an estimated 11. 6 million in revenues generated by wattiors project and results in estimated net revenues of 1. 5 million, and that is shown on table 3 again on page 9 of our report. On page 10 of our report, we note under the proposed ordinance the general funds contribution to the mission Bay TransportationImprovement Fund is capped at 90 of revenues generated by the project and ociis system, economic and Planning Systems attributed to the warriors project, generated offsite regarding that offsite revenues we state on page 11 of our report that the budget and legislative analyst notes that they can be be directly attributed to the warriors project. Its noticeble to poverify if changes in Hotel Occupancy are due solely to visitors who come to San Francisco specifically to attend warriors game or other events at the proposed Events Center. Such increases tax revenues might be attributable to visitors to San Francisco who do not attend events at the warriors project. Any methodology to attribute hotel and gross receipts to the warriors project is based on assumptions and not actually accounting of tax receipts and therefore, we do not include those offsite tax revenues estimated to be 1,709,165 and that is shown in the table 3 estimates on page 9 of our report. So our recommendation, supervisors, are on the bottom of page 11 of our report, no. 1 we recommend that you amend the proposed ordinance to specify that if the annual cap of 90 of general Fund Revenues from the project site and events at the Events Center insufficient to cover sfmtas expenditures for Transportation Services to the warriors project, then the warriors will be responsible to provide the additional Transportation Services to comply with the eir mitigation measures. Secondly we recommend that amend the proposed ordinance to specify that only tax revenues onsite by the warriors project are included in the controllers estimates of the general fund generated for the purpose of calculating the annual Fund Contribution to the Transportation Improvement Fund and we recommend that you approve this ordinance as recommended. We would be happy to responds to questions. Thank you, mr. Rose. Supervisor tang. Thank you. Im wondering based on mr. Roses second recommendation about revenues generated offsite if perhaps someone can speak to exactly how the methodology was completed . I know that based on mr. Roses report retail and office were not included, but if you could speak to the recommendation in further detail, that would be great . Sure. The supervisor through the chair, office of economic and workforce development, the fiscal feasibility that Keyser Marston peerreview and the controller concurred with it conservative estimates on and offsite. It does not include revenues generated by the tenants of the two office buildings. It does not include sales of the retail that is onsite, but outside of the arena. And where there is offsite spending on parking tax, on gross receipts, on retail, on hotel tax, we have explicitly conservative assumptions. The economic model that our controller uses and the consultant uses and common across the country in planned uses similar types of methodologies, in terms of estimating these funds. And we wanted to make sure we werent counting things, like somebody who is already visiting San Francisco on holiday, and happens to go to an event, or somebody who rents a hotel room in San Francisco, that displaces somebody who would be coming to rent the same hotel room for a different event. So we expressly cut the assumptions of those out, so that we have a very conservative estimate. We spent a lot of time discussing this, in part because San Francisco is blessed with high occupancy of its hotel rooms. They are about the 8086 occupancy at any given time, but the cost per room night has gone up so much in the last several years. So that we can generate a fair amount of hotel tax on a very small number of rooms. So we are prepared to make some amendments. We have had some conversations since the introduction of the ordinance today to expressly call out some of the neighborhood membership on the Advisory Committee as presented here today. And also, to separately line item, as part of the controllers estimates of revenues generated both onsite and separately listed those generated offsite. So we can fully estimate these. They are estimatable and invite our Controllers Office or our City Attorneys Office to add any particular details real quick, colleagues, those amendments that will vander water mentioned are reflected in the amendments i distributed earlier. There are some technical amendments solely proposed after Public Comment today to reflect the neighborhood concerns i have one small detail that the City Attorney has to hand to you as well. Okay. I guess, chair farrell, members of the committee, Budget Analyst Office and to make sure what our recommendation is and why its important. Were not actually weighing in on the fiscal financial analysis. Our concern was actual general Fund Revenues are allocated each year to this fund. And as you will see from our estimates, we actually estimated that direct general Fund Revenues would, in fact, be sufficient to cover the estimated costs of this project. We also had concerns that once you start using indirect revenues that arent where there is no actually direct accounting for those revenues could not accurately state those attributable to the warriors and thought it was prudent to recommendation direct revenues generated by the project. Which can be calculated based on actual tax receipts. I do want to point out when we also brought our report, there already were some differences from the eps estimate, the most significant one transfer take came in at 3. 9 million. So once you are doing those kind of estimates its really better to have the actual numbers and not the assumed number for the purposes of the fund. Appreciate that commentary and we can certainly have that policy discussion. Mr. Rosenfield, if you could touch upon your offices opinions and we had a conversation about whether this is subject to annual appropriation so we can handle it that way at the board anyway. Good morning, ben rosenfield, controller. I will start by pointing out that what mr. Rose is saying is correct here, of course, that this will fundamentally involve a projection. But our office would need to make in future years the extent the board adopts this ordinance. We do believe though and do routinely make estimates of these sorts of impacts for items that come before you for consideration. And so we do think while we cant directly account in the same way we can for property tax revenue, we can nonetheless reasonably estimate and reasonably project these indirect revenues that would be generated by the project. We have peerreviewed the Economic Impact reports