all of our businesses. we request that you give this project were full and complete approval, both at this stage and for the next age when it comes along. thank you. the president of the merchants association. so thank you very much. president maxwell: i have a question. douglas? sorry. maybe said when it happens, but i do not know. >> depending on when the permits are issued, in the process, on both of the lot, -- lost -- lots, and we're hoping it will be mid september, and then things will happen september,

october and there is not specifically a date in mind, but we are thinking march or april. president maxwell: ok, thank you. all right, colleagues, we will close public comment, and without objection, on items three and four. madam clerk, item number 5. madam clerk: item number five, a hearing on the progress of the housing program. president maxwell: rebuilding some of the most distressed. in revitalizing the communities. after several weeks of hard work, we have enjoyed the groundbreaking at our first place, hunters view it. the purpose of today's hearing

is for staff to provide an overview of the program and to give a progress report on several development sites in the pipeline. we wanted to bring in here today. it is not because anything horrible was happening, just that we wanted to update people. >> there are some wonderful things happening. we see this as an opportunity to get the public up-to-date. we will go as fast as you want us to go. there is a little bit of background. we will try to get into what happened last year with the important money the city invested.

we have two senior folks working on this. we have others here, so we're all here to provide some feedback. >> we have organize this into three kinds of key areas. just as a reminder, the city in this affordable housing dollars, block grant dollars, and there is lots of different ways in which we are investing, so our point here is to kind of help people understand where our money is going.

supervisor maxwell is very familiar. in 2006 and 2007, we had a task force which was intentionally very broad. when brought to the attendance, the chamber of commerce, the affordable housing advocates, legal activists. what we expected to do was create the full range of opinion in a task force so we could end up with something that we could be a consensus. in our effort to transform a public housing sites, and, again, to do this in a way that physically improves the location and enables residents to improve their lives, and at the end of the day, we are looking to have a mixed income community that has affordable housing, market rate housing, and other.

this is very much a public- private partnership. we meet all of the time, literally every week, with the housing and redevelopment agency's. we have seven city agencies that join us through the interagency council to look at services and delivery note and teams that are actively talking to us. and this will affect the redevelopment and rebuilding. they have really stepped up on

the efforts to bring philanthropy to the table and help us. there are some that are a part of this effort. back in the day when we were looking at this, the housing authority fiscal needs, millions of dollars on a million -- on a regular basis. this was not the resources, and it was a long type of -- in the meantime, these eight sides were part of a larger story which was about families in crisis and where were families in crisis living, and as they went out to work with those, we were not 26 us for helping families of we were not able to do anything about the deterioration and

concerns the people had, particularly with the public housing sites. and on the east coast in particular, you have very, very densely developed public housing. in san francisco, it is the opposite. through our analysis and work with analysis, we were looking to do it at a density that is typical in areas like hayes valley, to the early in our health these neighborhoods. so this is just a brief illustration of what we at the outset thought about capacity and potential. craig is going to talk to more about how the community process of lettuce to understand what really is a comfortable amount of new housing to occur on these

sites. this is a simplistic analysis that we are doing at the beginning. boppin this is potentially a site that would move forward in the near term. this is off of geary, and we of the developer here to talk about that if there are questions. piper there was a list of principles, how we started the topic. first and foremost on everyone's mind was insuring no loss of public housing. then go before the housing authority commission, and i think korea been very

successful -- and i think we have been very successful. i think there is lots of room to improve, but the outcomes that we have to date, and the direction we feel the we're going, i think a very exciting. we will talk more about that. so, again, just broadly speaking, three kind of maine buckets, if you will. one is the people but it. first and foremost, outcomes for the existing residents, this is not a plan that is principally for the benefit of the people who come behind them but for the folks who are living there today. secondly, and kind of the heart of what we have done today is really building a quality housing, infrastructure. a lot of this stuff has

deteriorated in need significant reinvestment, and korea will talk a lot about that. and we are not try to korea and thailand. we very much believe that what we're trying to do to the extent that these of become isolated from the neighborhoods around them or neighborhoods have sealed themselves off in some cases, separating housing from parts or whatever it would be, we are really trying to be part of a broader initiative. we're not trying to korean all the amenities and facilities that are around, and that is particularly true in the view -- which are not trying to create all of the amenities. -- we are not. what belongs where, and where can we add amenities in the right location, and it does not always involve gone right on the housing authority side, so with that, i am going to hand it over to greg, and then amy will come up, and at the end, we have ample time for questions --

handed over to a credit note -- hand it over to craig. >> hello, i will pick up from where dugger left off. -- doug lest off. there is the pie chart you see here. there is the commitment to provide one to one replacement cost to the housing that exists currently and then add beyond that a mix of incomes, including both new affordable rental housing, first-time homebuyer opportunities, and other opportunities, which creates a housing ladder, the idea of which is to allow existing

residents to stay in place so that if they so choose -- also to move into new housing opportunities. then, bringing additional residents and additional population to the area, creating a more typical mix and healthy mixed income community. president maxwell: when we're talking about 1 to 1 replacement, we are talking about bedrooms, as well? >> yes. president maxwell: with a 5- bedroom unit, that would mean with five, you would replace five? >> that is exactly what it reflects. thank you, supervisor. in order to facilitate in part the real estate transformation of the properties and also again that goal of making sure that existing residents and not only not displaced but that they have

as little disruption as possible, there is a phased development model across our largest sites. with the exception of west side accords, which is a smaller and more dense site, the other sites that we saw on the map will all be transformed in multiple phases, and the idea is to maximize where possible on site relocation opportunities, again mitigating displacement destruction of existing residents, and, finally, concept that i talked about the housing ladder company note but these housing types themselves in terms of quality in their appearance, it should be indistinguishable from each other, something we have learned from other models in the country. you walked down the street, and one should not be able to distinguish it least in terms of

building quality what is the public housing and what is the market rate. they're all of superior quality. president maxwell: supervisor chiu? supervisor chiu: york or to minimize the displacement of people as one is being built. >> west side courts in the out later -- outlier. the one that currently is at a density that is fairly comparable to the surrounding neighborhood, and the city as a whole, so the combination of these two pieces do not provide the opportunity for us to bring those up into phases, so the idea has always been that we have to demolish the entire site, and we will do that as a

single phase. supervisor chiu: and what are the ideas of relocating people of that has been developed? >> we are working on that with the residents themselves right now. i think we need to work that out in a formal relocation plan. we need to of a number of elements at our disposal, including relocation vouchers, which we do not have yet, but we are working with hud. one of the special circumstances, and i know that supervisor chiu is aware of this, we are looking at alternative sister sites. we do not have the ability to update the fall housing ladder, so the idea is to try to find a companion side, and we are in

conversations with mta potentially about entering into negotiations on ddot -- on the kirkland site. this will allow us to get a jumpstart on some of the replacement housing and potentially be able to relocate folks there or even permanently if they chose to relocate to the second side. does that answer your question? ok, so, i will talk a little bit -- back to the powerpoint -- about the funding model here. this boils down to three key components on how we're going to make this financially feasible. first is to capture again, piggybacking on don't vote -- on doug's point, there should be

inherent capacity and inherently did value in the existing sites. we're going to go ahead and both program radically in terms of developing the communities with market rate housing, but also use that as a financing engine and capture the value created through that potential for the units for the public housing replacement units. on top of the property value itself, we also plan to capture -- in terms of property tax revenue, or we would not exist for the city. this is against the future tax revenues, so these in combination created cross subsidizing component.

second is focusing city investment, so f8u and certainly supervisor maxwell, as well as the board of supervisors has committed local financing to this over a 20-year period to help facilitate the local peace -- piece of the public housing part. for almost a decade now, we have not been able to capture financing from the federal government, and yet, the problem continues to get worse, so, f.a.q, supervisors, for stepping up and for the city of san francisco say we are not going to let this problem continue to languish, and we're going to commit some local sources. along with the local sources for public housing is the idea did to take the existing capital we use for products across the city

that might benefit this site, and what comes through the mayor's office that we spend city-wide into focus that on developing new tax credit affordable housing as part of the housing ladder on part of that site, so, again, aligning the existing city resources and focus in that on these sites, and then, finally compaq -- finally, and significantly important is leveraging private, state, and federal resources, so i am pleased to report that on hunters view, we have been very successful at the state level, moderately successful, particularly, due to the director at the housing authority, in aligning some resources towards hunters view,

and we are still very much looking to continue the success with this program, which we did not get the last amount, but we're confident in our abilities. president maxwell: so the land that we have the we are going to be building new housing on, do we have to pay anything for that, or is that as part of what we already have? do we have to pay for the market rate for the affordable? >> we do not. we can think directort -- hank thank director alvarez. particularly with the financing mechanism, they are contributing lands, including the market rate pieces, which we will sell off and use those proceeds for the public housing replacements, and they are going to be affordable rent things sites -- rental sides.

s -- ites. the housing authority will have the opportunity to buy those sites backed -- back but assuming the debt. -- by assuming the debt. so our schedule in moving forward in very brief detail, and there is a lot more behind the scenes going on here, but, hopefully, we've already started on phase one hunters view, and some of you, certainly supervisor maxwell, was out there for a big celebration. we have completed the demolition of the phase one buildings, and we are very much focused on starting the underground work, will recall the horizontal and for structure work on the site this fall. we are pointing out that we will be back aunt -- back in front

of you hopefully in september with a number of items trying to get hunter's you going, some of them financial, including the $30 million of state grant money that we have an run that to the city and the development entity, and we will have to give your approval on that as well as our public debt financing mechanism, our certificates of participation, which we will need approval on those before we can finalize the financing of the phase one housing peace, and then lastly, more technically, the infrastructure piece will be on the plants, -- pklans, -- plans, which need to be finalized. president maxwell: what is our interest rate? >> our interest rate is likely to be 0%, because we have what is called soft get on the side

on top of the project. -- soft debt. in particular, with the infill grant program, because it is not our money, and we are essentially the condit, our main goal is to ensure that, because we will be taking on some of the responsibilities that go to the state for that money and as a recipient, we expect that to be passed along to the developer, we are not looking actually to get that money paid back. korea a whole lot of additional housing money that we do have money on, and hopefully, over time, we will get it paid back from the available revenue. so, secondly, alice griffith, which, again, you're all familiar with the candlestick park phase one plan, which is winding down this month, and, of

course, there are key components of approving that, which really will be moving full steam ahead on alice griffith, and we of the developer ready to engage the residents on a more detailed planning process on that. we have got others at, sunnyvales -- unnydale, and they have submitted for their environmental review to the planning department, which as you all know, it takes quite a bit of work. both of those programs have significant community facilities that they would like to accomplish, which take a lot of additional funding beyond the master plan but with the other city departments, and then, finally, as i mentioned earlier, hopefully getting into exclusive negotiating rights on kirkland yard with the mta.

supervisor chiu: i know we had a conversation but kirkland yard, but where is the mta proof that they want to let it go? >> -- where is the mta? that they want to let it go? >> we agreed that the next steps would be to have a citizens advisory committee and see what their response would be. there is absolutely nothing that has been agreed upon by the mta. if people are excited about it, -- we are looking for your feedback on that. supervisor chiu: i look

i know that amy is going to touch on the human capital side and the working with the residents some, and margaret campo from the developer is here. margaret regularly meets with the tenant association and members of the community, if you want more defail on that. -- more detail on that. 700,000 units will be replaced bedroom for bedroom. so if we hadn't said so already, it is certainly and clearly our

hope as a pilot project, first out of the gate. it has actually been in the works before hope s.f.. in some respects, hope s.f. came about in part from what we learned in our work today. we have master planned the site. we were with you for the whole approval and the design for development plan for the 700-plus unit community that is there. we are ready to start on phase one. we have started on phase one. we're ready to start the infrastructure on phase one and we'll be doing that shortly. this is probably about as broad of a public-private partnership as i would imagine one could expect. doug mentioned seven sister city agencies that we're working with. on the human capital side, i

would say we have as many on the real estate structure, including the p.u.c., planning department, department of public works, building department, m.o.d., et cetera. so a very broad-based public partnership, and then, of course, our developer, the one actual actually financing and doing the work a partnership of ridge development and a local nonprofit based in the area. they have a long history of both public housing revital zation -- revitalization, et cetera. >> if someone starts to move away during the development, can you plane the right of return to be able to move back once it's built? >> absolutely. i will ask for help if i'm stepping on my toes, but the housing authority commission has passed formal policy, a right to

revite lies -- revitalize housing property. that means any resident that starts from the time we start working on hope s.f. that remains in good standing has the right to a new unit once the site is revitalized. even if they move off site for their own reasons. there have been a handful of people that have requested to move off site, generally for medical reasons, and we've accommodated those requests. regardless of that fact those fokse folks have gone off site, they will have the chance to come back to the site as well. that's again, as doug hit on, our number one priority, and hope s.f. is making sure that the benefits of the investment are there for the existing residents. >> and somebody in good standing? >> ioi