for the inclusionary housing unit they're required to be broken into 3 tiers very low up to middle income low up to 70 percent and moderate chitchats one hundred and 10 percent. the unit are sold to a third party similar to what we do with nonprofits. overall the o pa between the master developer & a total of 20 percent of the units have been to affordable pardon this the broken down under the o pa. the full build out will have 2 thousand and 64 units. this is the 29 opts. so applying the 20 percent we're

required to have 5 hundred and 93 units and the developers are required to build a percentage. we have 6 hundred plus unit more than the ot a required so we're over leveling percent more than the original that was required. we have 20 more than the o pa. this is; however, while the master developer has succeeded those a they've not provided the breakdown as required. they built one hundred opt above that was required so even though we have 20 unit more if you do

the math we have the last requirement for the 80 moderate unit. this tramths to one hundred and 10 percent as a 4 percent household earning. we do anticipate that any additional moderate rate units will be built for affordable housing. the full built out in the south the oc i will have one hundred and 8 additional units. based on the affordability of the financing forces we anticipate all the 11 hundred units to be low and there's no other tax credit that target the moderate rate. there's an inclusionary requirement that requires an

inclusionary unit to target the low income. so block 4 p is the only additional income unit. so the xifs requirement is 80 unit with 49 market rate for sale for a total of 4 hundred and 29. this is a brief history of the site. it's on had one serious proposal since 1998. that developer for grassroots we approved the systematic design but the developer pulled out because they couldn't get the financing. personally, i joined the mission bay in 2007 and i got two or three calls from other

developers and none of them have progressed other than initial conversations. in addition the master developer told us they've been marketing this site with those existing o pa requirements and haven't been to attack the one developer who couldn't make it work, however, they started construction in 2011 and exploring opportunity to amend the o pa to make it feasible. just before i move on there was a systematic design and this design looks like this the integral are having this design. so we will not come back with the design if they change it significantly we'll come back to you for additional approval for

the design. as part of their due diligence they did an affectionate requirement. tim from the concord group is here to answer questions about the study. the study you found out that any moderate for sale units will have a public subsidy between 12 and $15 million. the finding were based on a conclusion that to be able to get the significant values you'll need from the 49 market unit for the affordability units due to the location up against the freeway and not having a

site large enough for significant benefits like a pool or other >> amenities. amenities. thank you very much. any amenities those projects will come in at the lower end so they even looking at the historic trends don't expect that those prices will allow the 60 percent inclusionary. so at the request of the oc ii and the mayor's office for the requirement the studies looking a range rental vs. for sale and looking at different financing tools to identify projects that would be feasible without

additional subsidy as part of the analysis they take into account what the concerns were and basically the high percentage of the inclusionary rates is concerned that it opens the prong to all the bad stuff you kind of cap on what you can get in revenue you're open to drops in the mathematics where you have the limited income sources. the oc ii staff have been working with the mayor's office of housing to evaluate the proposals for the advisors the financial analysis for the alternatives and as part of the analysis the standard market assumptions that a project with the 80 affordable units would

need 0 subsidy and there will still be a concern with the inclusionary requirements. in trying to identify financing. so at the end of this process financial feasible project rose to the top. we looked at a variety of projects there was one that came out that would have affordable units at one hundred and 20 percent of a m i. the land would be donated and the o pa didn't require them to donate the land and we'll insure the equity. what's important will the alternative it keeps us 80 close to the o pa goals to provide a

mixture of income levels in the affordable housing so we'll been to identify those component. and this will be important as we go forward to the financing department we are recommending to keep this as close to the original intent as possible. just for the one hundred and 20 percent in the market rates the affordable units will be at 24 hundred for one bedroom up to 4 thousand a month that compares for 3 thousand to $600 difference for 12 hundreds and that's based on 200 three numbers. also those units would be

subject to the mission bay north operation guidelines in the o pa. those give preference to the certify residents and then the larger public afterward. the o pa requires the diverse populations have a chance and then subject to lottery. then the remaining inclusionary units to go to rebel to for sale the number will go from 80 a .45 and feinstein the o pa unit will race it from one hundred 10 to one hundred 20 that allows us to get more unit. and so again comparison between

one hundred 10 and one hundred and 20 one hundred 10 will be one hundred and 7 percent year for household of 4 compared for the higher 20 percent >> so with implementation of the organization pa amendment and construction project at full build out we'll continue to exposed the requirement we'll have one hundred and 17 affordable housing units and that will be affordable that's a 7 percent point increase from the existing requirement and the master developer will build a 60 percent increase over the requirement. at this time, i'd like to invite vicky up and i'll come up later and close out the presentation

>> commissioner rosales and board of commissioners. i take it my pleasure to present i'm vicky i'm one of the owners and i run the division inside the company. i'd like do will to give a proclamation. this is a real estate and development company we're based in atlanta but we have one in san francisco. we focused on the revitalization and redevelopment of community. we started out in 93 and implemented as a lead partner with the atlanta housing authority we develop mixed model that are used across the country

where you have market rate community built to high standards but have the affordability and that model has been used across the country and san francisco as well. and sf is a resolution of this program. we excited and in doing so not only is the diversity of the workforce being the professionals will be helped through the design and i have a team of firms behind me if you'll raise our hand and acknowledge your presence and as mentioned bill katherine tim from the concord group to my right and is inside our finance

group. we're excel committed to representing the spectrum of the families but also in how's. we'll work closely with occ i staff, with nonprofits and community organizations to make sure as we go through our marking before we begin to take applications to make sure that the resident who live in the community represents the broader part of the city. thank you for the opportunity and we stand prepared to answer questions at the appropriate time >> thank you very much >> great as vicky mentioned we've been working closely with other depends. to date they've got 69

participation in the project and this is down to san francisco-based 44 m b e and 44 percent of other architects. the architects are a local owned s b e and during the construction part of the project we'll be working with incurring to insure they work towards the 50 percent sub constructing goal and workforce goal. this project was presented to the mission bay supervision committee and in september of this last year, we updated this so we can talk about the negotiations. the organization wants to see the last parcel developed. we reviewed it under sequa and

because there's no change the total number of unit constructed on site this is consistent with what's in the u r. so overall staff recommends the approval under the amendment. we feel this will allow for an economically project to be banishment and this supports the block and accelerates all the vertical development in the north. it will strengthen the economic basis and bring more revenues that will support the taxed under the resolution raw. also, we keep the intent on the site so we'll stay as closely as we can to the o pa, however, they don't propose any caps for

the project. the final step i'm assuming if you approve the project it will be continuous on the board of supervisors and department of of his opinion. because of the requirements and the board of supervisors 2 hundred and 15 dash 12 if there's any change to the housing program and noted to be you approved by the board of supervisors this determines it meditates the threshold. it will get based onto the board of supervisors once it goes to the board of supervisors it will be e go to the oversight commissioners and once they take action it automatically goes up to d o s. assuming everything goes

smoothing it will be in april for the final approvals. we're going to keep to the design and if there's any changes not consistent with the systematic otherwise we'll provide through the design. it is hopefully, if everything goes well, we'll start construction mid this year with completion in late 2014. to minimize the neighborhood disturbance reducing the overall construction time they'll use the prefafbd construction materials for the upper floors and we'll made it clear to them they'll still need to meet all the good faith effort for the construction goals.

so they're aware of that. this that concludes my report and i want to acknowledge pam as well as lila. unfortunately lila hurt her leg and she couldn't be here today. that concludes my presentation if you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them. >> thank you very much do we have any speaker card. >> i have one speaker card. corrin words. >> corrin woods chair of the mission board. this has been a long time coming. i think the mission bay cac is more aware than more people in san francisco about the difficulty of building affordable housing even when you

get the land donated. so walsh this project we very much support it. we are going to be talking to the cerebral pile driving and we're really gyroour break but we want to work with the project developer to get it done. the - i have a letter that's in your packet from ms. cowen who lives on berry street on the other homeownership project in mission bay. she's reviewed this closely i think a lot of the people who are in the affordable housing

condo project on berry street we're hoping to see more but it's stroll difficult to do a homeownership principal on affordable housing. and i think this goes into the really bigger picture in san francisco of - this this has taken seven years. every other project affordable housing project in mission bay has taken a comparable infamous mauchlt it takes the amount of time and effort to get moving. block 7 is difficult. as we look more at mission bay and the bigger affordable housing issues in the city we have to look at what is feasible and we have to look at alternative funding sources

because as we saw in this and hard it was we need to make it easier. thank you >> (calling names) >> good afternoon peter cowen from the housing u housing authority. i know that staff we've talked with the staff about this and they're not going to be happy. we don't agree with the inclusionary housing piece. we feel this took a lot of work but the inclusionary part of this is not about feasibility but about policy. again, the original obligation was for 80 units of first time 0 you ownership for the a m i. we learned from staff it's one

hundred and 40 plus first time homeownership in mission bay again there are 1 hundred and 20 percent of o m i. we saw that to make this feasible in switching to the number of units from to 60 at 60 percent a m i financing that allows them to co-author with other agrees you're getting an additional finance source and you're getting to partner with other community groups. we're concerned about one hundred and 20 percent a m i rentals in san francisco is unheard of we're talking about

first time ownership and there is no such thing as one hundred and 20 percent a m i rental for inclusionary. your 're reducing the units further to 40 opt because it has to be internally organized by the homeownership and your targeting to an income population that is really at an high-level. at reduced level you're getting a lot of rent and from a policy standpoint if you're using $8 million of subsidy is it best to go from incomes at that level or for the moderate and he lower income level. you folks need to think about this.

we think the original proposal with the state developer is good policy and fits with our middle income pricing for the entire city. i'll be happy to talk about it more. >> (calling names). >> thank you peter. commissioners there's a da limb here i've been facing since 1970 with affordable housing and i need to make a correction about hope 6 that you are not aware of. it was public housing tenant that brought hope 6 into hunter's point. it was in hunters view.

and now he made a statement about policy changing. you see your agency decided they want to make a policy change they make is and don't come to the people for their thoughts. i received a letter i have a certificate. i received my certify wouldn't be no good after 2016 what kind of of madness it that. there needs to be some discussions among you and your staff and your bosses the mayor of this city because i'm sick and tired of coming when i have worked with corrin for many years i have not just met him and he's been doing good work in the city and what they're doing and remind me what's happened to

the black contracts in hunter's point and of the city of san francisco we have one hundred and 7 subcontractors you've u you're running them away and bringing in people from other states and countries and the community and citizens of san francisco who helped to build this city is out. the ax a m i need to be looked. i received one thousand and $15,000 a year where, i live. thank god i'm a homeownership but what about those who are on social security and forced to move. what's going to happen. we're going to have more homeless. mostly everybody down of south of market and tenderloin came

from the fillmore and hunter point. you all need to have more hearings and meeting with michael and those of us who know the city and been involved in the city for the last 50 years before you a lot of you were born. i'm tired of corruption that's going on in the city. thank you very much. >> are this any more speaker cards. >> good afternoon. i'm mr. washington. excuse me. my and i'm suffering from a cold. i'm puzzleed i'm here to speak on the city government. talking about east lee and

governor jerry brown. i've been telling you all for the record right now i've come to the conclusion you've executed all of us not to say all the citizens of san francisco you talk about the backlog and backlash but the blacks are last. it's not a mirror's. i have to pack my things like i did in 1234508 and i've 0 got to testify because they're talking about the redevelopment agency. you all have to you are not talking about you're in the footprints that dr. jackson has said has been corrupted for a number of years we're the result of it. i'll speak on the fillmore but

the mission bay i know the brother jim jennifer would tell us i was with him. i'm one of his person that studied all he did but now you all in the mission bay and you over hunter view what have i done to the fillmore we've got the board of supervisors and we're the new era. we have no time for eras in the past that have failed. i like this team because it a looks good from the surface. i've seen my old friend here but i want to caution you all. you guys i don't blame you all for you'vepp