Committee corrects cost estimate, forwards Mills Act contract for 450 Pacific Avenue

The Government Audit and Oversight Committee on Dec. 15 voted unanimously to recommend to the full Board of Supervisors a Mills Act historical property contract for 450 Pacific Avenue, forwarding a contract under Administrative Code Chapter 71 and authorizing the planning director and assessor-recorder to execute and record the agreement.

Michelle Taylor, senior preservation planner in the Planning Department, told the committee that staff needed to correct the record on the estimated rehabilitation cost for the property. Taylor said staff had previously presented a 10-year rehabilitation estimate of $782,655 that omitted storefront rehabilitation; the correct 10-year valuation, she said, is $1,280,346. Taylor described the building as a four-story contributing property to the Jackson Square Historic District, originally constructed circa 1887, and outlined proposed work including a historically compatible storefront, parapet flashing repairs, roofing and window repairs, metal and skylight treatment, and brickwork cleaning and patching. She said annual maintenance is estimated at $14,725 and the property owner would receive an estimated property tax savings of $99,225, a roughly 26.46% reduction from factored base-year value.

The property owner, identified in the record as Mr. Feldman, thanked planning staff and supervisors for working to correct the project record. Vice Chair Aaron Peskin asked about the timetable for spending the roughly $1.3 million in work; Mr. Feldman said the front-of-building renovation is phased over about eight years to align with tenant turnover and that storefront work would be timed to occur when the retail space is unoccupied.

Peskin also raised a discrepancy between Taylor’s year-one savings figure and an assessor spreadsheet showing about $107,000 in year one. Mr. Jain, an assessor’s representative, told the committee that the difference reflects an updated factor-based value (2021 vs. 2020) and that the storefront upgrade would likely add value in 2029, which would affect future Mills Act calculations. Jain explained the spreadsheet’s 20-year view: years 1–10 reflect a normal Mills Act contract and years 11–20 reflect the assessor’s nonrenewal calculation, which can substantially reduce projected annual savings (he cited an illustrative drop to about $46,000 under nonrenewal).

The clerk reported there were no public callers on the item. Supervisor Peskin moved to recommend the contract as a committee report; Peskin, Member Matt Haney and Chair Marr each voted “aye.” The item will be considered by the full Board of Supervisors at its next scheduled meeting.

The committee record shows staff corrected the earlier cost estimate, the assessor clarified the valuation and nonrenewal assumptions, and the owner described a multi-year, occupancy-driven schedule for rehabilitation work.