it's on file with the secretary as well available to the public. >> good, i'm glad you got a copy of it. you'll recall on april 30, 2013 the commission authorized a personal services contract with the sfcta in an amount not to exceed $365,000 for the off ramp realignment. they have now submitted it to cal-trans. if the agreement is approved staff anticipated the start of construction in mid 2014. the off ramp realignment is a major implementation agreement between ocii and transbay

powers authority. if we could get the projector going i seal i'll show you what it looks like today.

staff is requesting authorization hard and soft costs for a turnkey delivery of the realigned off ramp and the total cost is estimated to be $2.833 million which includes hard cost, project reserves, construction management services and other construction support costs as detailed in the table attached to the staff memorandum. zip since the project will not bid until early 2014 is awarded

contract price will not be known until the spring of 2014 and the staff will provide an update to the commission at the time, but we need an agreement now prior to the issuing of those bid documents. my staff is also proposing a somewhat different approach to contracting policy in this agreement, as explained in your memorandum. traditionally the former agency such as the department of public works when entering into contracts like this off ramp.

for the remainder of the amount of the contract we are actually still negotiating with the transportation authority about the exact type of lbe versus sbe programs to use. the city has an lbe program that has a disadvantaged component. the transportation authority does not use that program so we'll continue negotiate /w-g them to try to use the city's

list. we weren't able to get agreement on that before this meeting, but we'll continue to do that and if we're not able do that we'll comprise the commission of the status of those negotiations, but /tphas the way the agreement is written right now so if there's any change to that we'll let you know as soon as we know. and then secondly for local hiring, sfcta doesn't have an adopted policy in that case, but they eve expressed a preference for the city's local hire policy. after careful consideration of this issue staff is proposing to apply the city's local hire policy on all construction work. this is the approach they would have used if the local hire policy had been in place at that time, but the city only adopted the policy in december 2010 and the agency didn't do any contracts for intrastructure work after that. this is the first one where they'll be applying this policy

to one of its projects. the alternative, which we also considered would be to have the transportation authority require the selected contractor to enter into a construction work force agreement similar to what we typically require of our private developers when we do a disposition and development agreement. the differences between the two policies are described in your staff memorandum and i'll go through them again if i could get this on the overhead too. this table was in your staff memo and as you can see, it shows the differences between our construction work force agreements and the city's local hire policy. as you can see, while ocii's construction work force goal for other agreements is 50 percent of all project work hours, it is a goal. by contrast, the city's local hire policy has a minimum requirement of 30 percent and

includes requirements for hiring disadvantaged workers. 50 percent of all project work hours be performed by local apprentices which helps lay the ground work for future san francisco workers. we believe these have strong /pher merit, but ocii /spwoepbdz to retain the office of economic and work force development to monitor the ta's compliance with this local hire policy and oewd has had significant experience enforcing this local hire policy. in addition the requirements for disadvantaged workers and local apprentices address important policy goals that are not present in the work force agreement. finally, although this is a relatively small project at under $3 million, staff would like to try the city's hoe cal

hire policy. on this /kraebgt contract in order to compare that policy with ocii's construction work force agreement and help with any future policy discussions that may take place. the use of the city's local hire policy on this contract doesn't bind ocii to use it on future contracts, but at some point the commission may wish to consider using that policy for future contracts. that concludes the presentation on this item. myself and or senior civil engineer and the project manager from the transportation authority are all here to answer questions. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. is there any public comment on this item? i have no speaker cards. >> thank you very much. commissioners, questions, comments? >> i move that -- >> okay. >> yes. i had a question on a statement

you made regarding that we were trying to have the transportation authority use the city's local business program. everyone knew i would raise this issue. so why is it such a tough sell? >> i don't know that it is, we just haven't been able to get clearance from the transportation authority. they had a lot of people out of town and this issue only came up in the last day. what the problem was that we had language in the agreement which was not defined to their satisfaction and so they wanted to get a definition from us and we were only just able to get that to them today. we'll have to go back and check with them before we know we're able to prove that, but i don't know that it'll be as tough a sell as it might be. >> given that the authority is the board of supervisors -- >> yes, we totally agree. but the authority currently has not adopted that policy so they'll have to affirmatively

approve it. >> for some reason i totally misread the memo when i got it. i do appreciate the fact that we are trying something different here and i would just ask that if you can provide us with regular updates on how the whole process goes as opposed to our current work force policy. just a comment. >> thank you very much. i have a specific question. i know we have the info item on [inaudible] is that being released tomorrow? read the whole thing tonight at 3 o'clock in the morning with a question you'll get back to me? >> absolutely. we still have an opportunity to make ed edits before tomorrow if you have them? >> unfortunately i got married last weekend so -- >> great excuse. >> okay. i guess i didn't know we were

releasing it so soon. on this particular item, appreciate you using the city local hire ordinance. i do think that that will end up, setting a precedent for us. we did approve the predevelopment cost for the exact same project so those two items are connected. thanks. i think commissioner sing has moved the item to approve the resolution. any other questions or comments? second? thank you very much. madam secretary, please call the roll. >> the vote is five i's. >> thank you very much, please call next item. >> item five e, authorizing a ground /hraoesz with california limited partnership for the

development of 120 very low income single at 1751 carol avenue. , formerly known as 5800 third street, block 5431a lot 42 . >> commissioners and members of the must public, thank you for sticking with us. this particular item, carol avenue senior, really this action before you is a continuation, it's really in furtherance of previous actions you've taken. in september you approved a permanent gap financing for the project of approximately $19 million and an option to ground lease. as you heard from previous speakers, the particular disposition was identified in our property management plan so now this ground lease is a disposition for your

consideration today because we'd like them to get started, get moving on this development, which is very critical for the bay view and bay view hunters point as a whole. with that, i'd like to ask pam simms to present this item. >> good afternoon commissioners, president johnson . i think that's still your last name. >> for now. >> for now? i'm pam simms, i'm a project manager and i'm before you this afternoon to present on item e which is the ground lease associated with the development of carol avenue senior housing or the senior housing project in the former bay view hunters point redevelopment project area. specifically the request is to approve a ground lease. the ground lease is necessary

for the development of the senior housing project, which includes 1212 -- 121 units and a ground floor senior center which will serve the residents of the building and the larger community. the approval process for this much needed housing development began approximately three years ago, although the idea was more than a decade ago. when in september 2010, the redevelopment agency commission authorized the purpose of 5800 third street. shortly thereafter in january the commission approved an initial predevelopment loan of $684,000. there was a subsequent predevelopment loan allocation of $3.2 million approved by the loan committee. in february 2013 the over sight

approved $20 million for the carol avenue development as part of 1314a. and as a note, last week the developer learned that their applications for funding to the state were received, accepted and approved. quickly i just wanted to show you a site map to point out 5800 third street housing will be in relationship. it's lot 3. lot 2 will be family house that will be developed sometime in the next year and on lot 1, that is facing third street and there's a condominium development and retail on the

ground floor. 5800 third street is the first phase of alice griffith. as a background the hunters point shipyard obligates the successor agency to rebuild alice griffiths. they commit the successor agency to use property tax revenue for the housing obligation and finally the dda states the successor agency will seek other sources of funding to help develop the site including state and federal funds. to that end, in 2011, alice griffith public housing was awarded $35 million. the redevelopment agency as a commitment to an implementation of the transformation plan which is required under the cni grant.

further they agreed to be responsible for the implementation of the neighborhood component. the developer identified and agreed the senior housing project would be /tpauz one phase one of the alice griffiths development who may want another housing option. all the alice griffith housing units will be placed on site, any qualified residents who want to live off site will be prioritized to live at the senior project site. and typical with various affordable funding sources, ocii funds, tax credit equity, tax exempt bonds, iig, which is

infill and infrastructure grant funding. the population who will live at the senior housing ing development are seniors aged 55 years and older. if must believe at or that would be $35,450. 37 of the units will be targets at or $21.250 for a one person household. all 120 affordable housing units will have the residents paying no more than 30 percent of their limited income towards rent. priority pop haitians will be the /praoefsly stated alice griffith residents, /sert

certificate preference and potential referrals entities include the southeast community health center and the providence foundation. quickly, the development consists of two wings. the subject development is on lot 42, the building includes the housing lobby, the senior center lobby, offices for the senior staff. there's also to the rear of the development landscaped courtyard and potentially vegetable herb garden for the seniors to work in. interior development consists of 117 one of those is a managers unit. common area amenities include

sitting areas, a living dining room, exercise room and laundry areas which are sprinkled throughout the development and adds to the community experience which pulls the seniors out of their units and to mingle with other seniors. the bay view senior center will be relocated from its current site to a larger approximately 14,000 square foot site within the senior housing project. in addition to the relocation of the program, the third-party payee and housing assistance programs will be relocated to the cash site. the ground lease itself allows the development of the affordable housing project. ocii will retain control of the land through a ground lease throughout the construction period. at project close out the ground lease will be all transferred

to community development per board resolution 112 which moans the mayor's office of housing is a successor housing agency. the terms of the ground lease are an initial term of 55 years with one 44 year /opg option for a total of 99 years. the annual rent would be $564,000. if there's any cash -- and it'll only be due to the extent that there's cash flow available to pay the residual rent. in order to have consistency with the loan agreement the ground lease has the same restrictions such as affordable, construction, reporting and contracting policies. community support -- the bay view hunters point community has been consistent and enthusiastic supporter of the

senior housing development, especially the senior center. as part of the community, the project area committee was always supportive of this development and as recent as may of this year, the development received support at a meeting held in the community to discuss specifics of the development. next steps, next week we will go to the oversight board and have them consider the approval of the ground lease for carol avenue and if the oversight board approves this item then it'll be sent to department of finance for its approval and will be able to execute the ground lease. staff will start the bond issuance process with the board of supervisors in november and finish in december. they will finish the ground lease early next year after the board of finance approves the disposition of the ground lease

and financing will close no later than march and once financing closes construction can begin. in the winter of 2014 marketing plan will be submitted and it will be reviewed by ocii and mohcd staff. marketing will begin in summer of 2015. in the fall of 2015 it will receive its the development should have 95 percent occupancy and finally by the winter of 2016 the developer will have closed the project and the loan, land will have transferred to the office of community development. that concludes my presentation. i'd like to introduce the staff that's here, kathy davis from the bay view hunters point. we would be happy to answer any

questions you might have. thank you. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item. >> i have one speaker card. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is oscar james. this is a proud day for me to support this project. i have only one problem with it. i hope it be named after doctor davis and have a picture of doctor davis on there so when people pass by it they can see his picture, how he fought to have this train become a reality. and i also like to thank mrs. davis for all of her hard work in doing everything she can do to make this project a success. one other thing, i like the part where you have homeless would be a part of this

particular project. i'm sorry i won't be able to be a part of the project because of the agency giving me a nice salary, retirement salary, but i will be able to go participate with the other seniors being that i'm 67 now. thank you. >> thank you. any further speaker cards? thank you very much. we've heard a lot about this project over the years and i'm happy and proud we're at this point today. i like oscar's question about the naming rights. i think that's a later point. are there any questions on the ground lease of the project? commissioner,ellington.

>> i heard there was a date for the hud funding. can you talk about that and where we are now? >> thank you. actually it was a december '13 correction start. that said, we discussed it with the developer and it's impossible to make that date so the develop will be submitting a request to extend the construction start date into the -- i think it's march 30, 2014. i'll let the developer address that issue. also tish >> sure. >> yes, so we were granted an extension to commence construction at tend of the

year by hud. fortunately this first phase extension is something that is not statutory so staff will be able to allow for such an extension. we have a call scheduled tomorrow with hud to go over the extension and we don't anticipate any issues with extending to the end of march. >> gotcha. i want to touch on the -- i won't. never mind. that's it. >> thank you. any other questions or comments? >> i was curious, on page 5 of the is staff memo on the marketing of the units, it does say as required by the ocii loans. i guess the question is on the marketing side of it, is the priority order that's listed

here the residents obviously of the alice griffith housing development, that makes sense to me, the hunters point makes sense to me, but why does western edition come in the next line up as preference holders? >> thank you. it's actually because they are certificate of preference holders. they always take perez precedence and preference in any of our development in this development it's extra special in that alice griffith is even above the certificate of preference. >> as between the hunters point holders and the western edition is that because it happens to be in hunters point? >> correct. >> okay. >> to that, the priority, two through six is actually codified. that's the required ordered in

the redevelopment plan that add ten years of community process so this was per the bay view communities desire that this should be the order. then because of the infusion of choice neighborhoods and the connection to /alg alice griffith, that's first and then the rest of the order. >> while we're on the subject, if we can i guess, begin to have the conversation around just this whole lottery system. i know that we have discussed this many in the past and we had an update, but it seems as we begin the transfer of these assets, we have a system that's inefficient and i don't know how to address, but i think there should be some type of consideration made, again, as we begin to transfer these assets, it's our duty to make sure that the right folks get into these units and it would

make no sense to transfer as assets with a broken system. >> thank you. actually to that end, we have kathy davis who's the executive director of bay view hunters point and she is probably the single most successful person outreaching to our certificate of preference holders. she started working with the bridge housing, she continued it with the mary helen rogers development and now she gets to do it with our own development. i'll let her talk about her outreach efforts. >> thank you. well, the issue that i have, and i will do my best to find as many certificate holders i have. issue i have is the same issue