accommodates food trucks. here is the area in which the projects are situated. you can see the streetscape improvements, dog run, and state park structures, and the hub at the dead ended portion. in summary, the city is obligated to the construction of part of the boulevard, the rehabilitation of portions of van ness, and the ancillary projects. items in red have already been completed. you see this cost is presented as a range. we have received revised estimates from various city departments that the cost associated with this work has increased to 12 1/7 dollars million. we have a revised $12.70 million estimate.

the cost is between 41 and 45 million. now that we have covered how we are required to spend any funds generated, i want to walk through how we generate those funds -- mainly by selling parcels. the parcels of unlettered a through v. we have printed a map of each of the parcels for members of the committee, which will hopefully make the alphabet soup easier to follow. i have additional copies available for the public, near where the agendas are available. you can help follow along. in 2002, soon after the parcells had been transferred to the city, the city entered an agreement with the redevelopment agency. the agency purchased two parcels at market rate. this is essentially an

overpayment. those parcels were not yet entitled. a key tenet was the provision so that any funds left after the city fulfills its obligations would be given to the redevelopment agency to adjust the purchase price. this was a fun dimensional -- a fundamental premise. it was instrumental in the construction of aqaba boulevard. the came forward with the understanding that the purchase price would be adjusted in the future. the transfer agreement included an option to transfer an additional five parcels, should they so choose. in fact, the redevelopment agency exercised the option to purchase an additional five parcels, at a cost of $12 million. the total amount was $17.80 million.

at this point, i would like to ask the director of the mayor's office of housing to come to the podium. >> the redevelopment agency -- i was at the agency at the time -- was presented with an opportunity to collaborate with the city family to stitch up the neighborhood. as some of the earlier slides showed, there was a community planning process that started and ended in 2008. at the same time, there was a desire to begin the construction of the replacement to the central freeway. the agency purchase of the

parcels really facilitated that that work could continue -- could start and be completed in a timely manner while the community was looking at the issues of overhaul neighborhood -- of overall neighborhood design, how to deal with these diagonal parcels that went through the city blocks, and how to stitch the neighborhood back together. the redevelopment agency purchase of land that was known at that point p, which was on entitled -- unentitled, greatly contributed early money to the process of rebuilding the neighborhood. i think the agency took on the responsibility that was outlined by the board in terms of providing for half of the

affordable units as affordable housing. we did a couple things in addition to doing the affordable housing. one of the things the agency participated with the other city departments, especially oewd, is not only the general design discussions related to planning, but also a design competition for the various parcels. again, to give a road map to how the neighborhood would want to see the community be built, the winning architect of the design competition was a young architect named amid patel. he developed this as an associate of david baker and associates. we used those sorts of guidelines when we are talking

about how we would develop our affordable housing, because that was in conjunction with the design goals of the neighborhood. we worked very hard with the neighborhood to ensure there was good quality design. i think the buildings that you will see reflect the interests of the neighborhood, with good quality design and affordable housing to the rebuilding of the neighborhood and added a variety of affordable housing to serve the broad scope of affordable housing. i would like to thank the opportunity -- take the opportunity to thank my colleagues in the neighborhood association for their wonderful support of the affordable housing developments. before you are three of the completed projects that the

redevelopment agency supported. those are the park view terraces, developed by ccdc, an award-winning development with 100 units of low-income and senior housing. the one below that is the mary helen rogers development, which is under construction today. again, another 100 units of affordable senior housing with a former lead-homeless component. the last on this page is the richardson apartments, which was recently opened. we had the fortune of having supervisor kim there for the opening. what i presume will be another award-winning building. this is another building that will be supported by the department of public health through their direct access to housing program.

the next slide show -- one additional product that was done, the octavia court. this was done with west by housing -- west bay housing. it is for individuals that are developmentally disabled. it comes with a wrap-around surfaces from the regional center. we have three additional parcels left to develop. we are looking for family rental housing on one parcel, transitional age youth housing on the other, and possibly ownership housing on the last one. the agency invested, in addition to the acquisition of the land, which was used -- our total purchase price was about $18 million.

building the boulevard and some of the related traffic improvements was $23 million. clearly, the $18 million purchase price was a great contributor to allowing the city to proceed with the boulevard. but in addition to that $18 million, the agency has invested other funds from the housing fund for the vertical development. these sums are listed in this slide. today, we have invested approximately $36 million. we have also leveraged twice that amount in terms of low income housing tax credits, section 202 programs, and other sources of funding that we brought to the neighborhood for the neighborhood rebuild. so our contribution is much more than just that we acquired the

property, or even more than the local funds we put into the property as our investment. we brought those additional resources to the neighborhood, and to individuals needing affordable housing. at this point, in terms of what is needed to sort of complete our role in what is a, sort of, a large collaboration of city departments, we are looking at sort of a local need of approximately $40 million to complete the affordable housing program. we have three parcels left to develop. i think that if you were to look at the market rate and the affordable parcells on the map, you will see that the affordable parcels are substantially done. if we had waited for the proceeds from the market-rate parcels to build the boulevard, we would still be waiting today.

the affordable housing -- i will use a very often-used phrase, a double bottom line. it will help facilitate the timely creation of the boulevard in addition to meeting the affordable housing goals of the city. at this time, i would like to turn the presentation back to kelly. >> thanks, olson. the city made a conscious decision that beyond the sale of parcels to the redevelopment agency that it would wait to sell the larger parcels until the community process successfully completed. you will see the sales that did occur prior to plan adoption, mostly focused on subdividing existing parcels into squares and rectangles, and selling the oddly-shaped remainders, mostly to adjoining property owners. those sales generated $5.40

million, for a total before market octavia plan adoption of $32 million. since the plan was adopted, the city has sold five parcels for a total of $21.70 million. finally, i would like to discuss where we are in the process of, as also mentioned, stitching together this neighborhood. approximately 943 units will be constructed on these properties. of those over 900 units, 492 are estimated to be at an affordable level, a 51.2% affordability level. i would like to cover some of the temporary uses. it goes without saying that several years saw land prices at lower levels than historical found in the city. it was unintentional decision, in addition to waiting for adoption of the market carpe diem plan, to delay sale of some

of the larger parcels until the market recovered and the city would see a better sale price. while waiting for the market to recover, we heard from neighbors that they did not want to see vacant lots for the next five or 10 years. we pursued innovative temporary uses on some of these parcels. on parcels k and l, you will currently find proxy, which is in mixed-use retail pop up. we have a coffee roaster, ice- cream, rotating food trucks, and a beer garden. on parcels o and p, the largest, you will find the hayes valley farm. on parcels r and s, you'll find the growing home community garden. in all of these cases, we were fortunate to find partners who were willing to work with us, who understood the temporary nature of these parcels, and

were willing to take a risk and do something innovative for a short time, to make sure there were not a lot of empty lots dotting the neighborhood. the city sees interim revenue from leases on these parcels. parcel e is a long-term lease of the school district. parcel f is leased to the opera. that will cease shortly, because it is in the process of sale. the city does see a limited amount of revenue from two of those. here you see the revenue associated with adoption, $3.50 million. the boulevard was constructed at a cost of approximately $23.50 million.

in the adoption, the city has already sold, or is in contract to sell, five parcels. in addition, we have accounted for the cost of leases with caltrans for those ancillary projects underneath the freeway structure. caltrans is unable to sell those parcels to the city. we are required by state law to negotiate a fair-market place for those parcels. that is 20 years. you see the low income housing fund of $6 million. with the revised estimate of the cost of restoration, there is potential for either breaking

even or an approximate $3 million shortfall. i will also mention for those who recall the sale of parcel f the $2.50 million associated. i have also included the full $6 million in the uses column. the sale of that parcel stipulated that those funds go directly to the mayor's office of housing. to be technically correct, i might remove this line from the sources, and reduce the uses line. but for completeness, i included it here. i wanted to give you that footnote. to address the potential shortfalls i have discussed, we will look at those parcels which are not yet in contract for sale. there are a total of six parcels that, based on formal appraisals which have already been conducted, we have a good idea of the value, approximately $4.70 million, which would more than account for the shortfall, should it

occur. we have an ongoing revenue source coming from our existing leases. last but not least, i wanted to give the committee a quick picture of those items which should be coming before you in the near future. in the broadest scope, what we must complete are the central freeway chancellery project, the rehabilitation of van ness avenue, selling parcels that are not yet in contract, and executing and mou regarding timing and sequence of obligations. as for those items which might come before this committee, both leases for the state park and the dog run parcells will need board of supervisors approval. the street underneath mccoppin will need to be adjusted. as a reminder, the items you have already authorized in the 2009 ordinance we discussed,

which is the disposition of remaining parcels at market rates. that concludes my presentation. i am happy to answer any questions you might have. thank you. chairperson chu: thank you very much. do you want to open for public comment? supervisor olague: yes. there are no speaker cards. chairperson chu: are other members of the public who wish to speak on item 13? i do have two speaker calls i will call, michelle and robin. speak closer to the microphone. hold on one second. go ahead. >> does this work? i am michelle. i have been a software engineer in san francisco for the last nine years. six years ago, and became a resident at 635 valencia.

i bought into it as a second owner of a condo bill through the major's program. supervisor came, you were nice enough to come to our open house the other week. i wanted to be here to represent the valencia homeowners association and some residents, and let you know that we are patiently waiting and dealing with the everyday -- the homelessness and the letter, the vandalism that goes on under the freeway. it affects our everyday life. i moved in with the premise there were these funds reserved for these ancillary projects to build a dog park and a state park. -- skate park i hope the city reward our patience by not threatening the funds that are budgeted for the ancillary projects, making sure

that those to follow through and are not lost sight of. think you very much. chairperson chu: thank you very much, and thank you for your patience in waiting for the hearing. >> good afternoon, supervisors. rabin levitt, from the hayes valley neighborhood association. i am holding in my hand the text of proposition i, the last proposition that past, in 1999. i do not want to go into too much detail, but it is clear, and i will leave these copies with you, that the proposition -- the funds for the sale of freeway parcells was to go for transportation improvements related to our table and boulevard, and nothing else. not for building a boys and girls club or building affordable housing, even though it calls for affordable housing in this area, but for

transportation improvements related to octavia boulevard. these include the oak fell corridor, mission corridor, the upper market corridor, and so forth. hayes valley, if we had not spearheaded the effort to bring down the central freeway, would have the freeway there today and would not be having this discussion now. we spearheaded the effort to implement the market octavia plan, which calls for affordable housing in this neighborhood. we have been very supportive of affordable housing. we have been supportive of building new housing in this neighborhood. but also we had the expectation that there would be some transportation improvements related to octavia boulevard, which have never happened. we have a lot of problems in the neighborhood.

market and octavia are probably the worst intersections in the city in terms of collisions. we have gotten no relief from the traffic that goes through this neighborhood, as a result of octavia boulevard. we would like to see attention paid to our neighborhood, and give us some relief from some of these problems. that is the point i would like to make. chairperson chu: thank you very much. next speaker, please. if there are other members who wish to speak on item 13, please line up in the center aisle. >> my name is steven henry. i am a property owner on elgin park. i bought a condo conversion. i am in one of the units. i also want to thank the oewd for their presentation. for about a half years, i have

gone to those meetings where they were talking about the planning of this project. a couple of things i hope the supervisors have clarified for me -- i see on the note it said the skate park is finalizing the design. i thought those designs had already been finalized. i also see community design listed under the dog run. the plans that were approved for the dog run and kids' park, as well as basketball courts -- it became clear the city would not allow a kids' park under the freeway. i understand that. what i do not understand is where the funds are going, seeing how it has been turned from a three-use space to a single dog run space. is there a savings there? where is the money going? is it staying in the community?

i would like to end with on elgin park, some of the work has started. they have started installing the pipes and improving the streets. the process has been anything but smooth. one of the things we have taken on as residents there -- simple things like placing signs to keep cars from parking. damage occurred because the signs were not clear and the city truck ran over one. i want to know when things will be read curbed, when the suns did not take place. the neighborhood -- will be red- curbed, when the signs did not take place. chairperson chu: a few more speakers. any order is fine. >> good afternoon.

peter cohen, with the council of community housing organizations. i want to thank you for having this hearing. it gives us an opportunity to retell the story that has 12 years of history, and understand where we are and how we got to where we are. there is a piece of this that is important to emphasize. octavia boulevard was built early on, and stimulated a lot of investment and activity in the hayes family. the money, primarily, for that boulevard, came from affordable housing money to buy those parcels up front. that was $18 million of the advance money from the affordable housing fund to allow that early stimulative investment. i want to show you a memo in 2009 from staff at a we w d -- oewd, rich hillis.

there was an important provision for what you can see in this analysis. they anticipated it would be around $13 million of funds back to affordable housing. this is the projected surplus from the land sale proceeds. i see from the presentation now, because of recalculation, it is looking something like $6 million. we would like to think we can get back as much of the original and expectation as possible. we understand it was dynamic. it disappointed me to hear a previous speaker say there is no expectation for money to go to affordable housing. this is repaying a loan. this was an understanding there was going to be fun-end money from the redevelopment agency -- front-end money from the redevelopment agency that would be returned.

the transportation authority were not able to, so the redevelopment agency became the friendly partner in the investment. i would ask that the honored and understood as part of the story. chairperson chu: thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is jason anderson. i am with the hayes valley neighborhood association. this is put our organization in an awkward position, and i want to think supervisor-- thank supervisor olague for calling this hearing. our neighborhood has a long tradition of supporting sustainable transportation investment. there was a compact made when the freeway was removed that there would be investment in traffic measures and improving transit, and so forth. muni is bogged down in miserable congestion in that area. something needs to get done. our organization also has a long history in supporting affordable

housing, including backing parcel g, octavia court, and working with the mayor's office of housing on 55 laguna. there is a bit of a disagreement within the different city agencies, with the ta insisting that all the proceeds go to transportation, and specifically to repaving van ness. at the same time, there is this true-up. if that is owed to affordable housing, we need to respect that, and we need to find money elsewhere for the van ness repaving. we are a big supporter of rapid transit, but if the redevelopment agency did lend money -- and it is not clear. it seems to be he said, she said. i guess i would ask that the board ask the city attorney to

clarify exactly how much is owed, and if it is true, i guess the needs to be a true-up. chairperson chu: thank you. next speaker. >> i am also with hayes valley neighborhood association. i would like to thank the other speakers for taking on all the quantitative and complicated issues. i am a big supporter of what has gone on with the process so far, when you look at richardson and developmentally disabled housing. wonderful stuff has been happening. other wonderful stuff has happened on the temporary uses. hayes farm has almost gotten worldwide acclaim as a cutting edge use. we now have a very interesting use with the property on parcels a and l. whawo