rooms and meditation room. we have been able to internalize all the spaces. >> i apologize. you say there was no entrance along third street. it looks like one here? >> that is a fire exit which we had hoped not to put there but working in the building department there seems to be no other solution bought the put a fire safety this. we are going to do with a we can to make sure it's not mistaken for the front of the building. the use of this building, security is kind of critical and it's important there be one point of entrance. after a lot of deliberation we felt that the mission bay commons side near third street was most appropriate.

>> okay. this question is for staff. on third street along that block, what's on the other side of the street? >> the opposite side of this is an existing condominium oh. the bossa tour and they have bottom retail. there is a chain and they are working on that. small market is what i have heard, but i haven't seen anything come through yet. >> yeah, the chase is already there. >> okay. thank you very much. are there any questions or comments? >> i just have a comment. the color is very nice. >> you need more of it. >> yes we do. i would say that general comment as well. that's a great design. it's challenging to properly mask something of this type of use

on that block, and i think it's a great use of space for the most part. i think really good job, everybody. any other comments, questions? commissioner mondejar? >> a question for staff. you have all these conditions of approval, so, are you still going to come back to us after all of these conditions are met or are you just going through for the staff is going to recommend all of these? >> for conditions we typically have conditions on. there is also some if iness of building. if we change anything to the significance of the design we would come back to you for approval. the intention is to if iness what

you approve today. effect the frontage we want to emphasize that was an important facade. they are all important but this one specifically to how do you design the windows so you provide enough privacy so they don't pull the blinds. if you just have blank window, the blind will be pulled and blinds will not activate. if you have transparent to have maximum kind of interaction between the building and pedestrians while still recognized that someone at their desk doesn't want somebody looking at them. we try to identify points to make with the developer to make sure these are important points to continue with. the idea is that we are getting pretty far in the design and it's not major changes to come back for. these are all if

inessing at a staff level. >> thank you. okay. no further comment. this is an action item to approve schematic design. do a hear a motion? >> i have one question. how much is it going to rent for some of these places? >> there is no rent. everybody who stays at family house stays for free. that's how we've operated for the past 33 years and that's how we will continue to operate. >> how can you afford that? >> we do all the fundraising privately from individuals, corporations and foundations. we don't receive any government help and we don't charge anybody anything and we continue to run that way. >> okay. you are doing a wonderful job. >> thank you. >> i move that.

>> thank you very much. is there a second? >> second. >> thank you very much. madam secretary please call the roll. commissioner ellington, mondejar, commissioner sing, rosales, johnson. the vote is 5 ayes. >> master plan amendment: the applicant requests approval of resolution for the cuesta al este master plan amendment. the cuesta al este master plan area includes property known by legal description laws unit 13, blocks 38-41, various lots. case no.: 13-410-00021234 approving a memorandum of understanding with the san francisco office of economic and work force development to provide work force compliance services for the office of community investment and infrastructure in fiscal year 2013-2014. and 2014-15 for a total aggregate amount not to exceed $278,000. >> thank you again for your attendance. commissioners as you know each of our major

groups of project areas there is a significant amount of work left to be done in entrance bay as well as all of the retained affordable housing obligations. part of your scope and review is not only design review, but implementing the terms and conditions of a contract that you approve, a core component of those contracts. we have goals for small business, both on the contracting side and the construction side and the proposed mou before you is the office of economic work force and development to help us complete this program. with that i would like to ask deputy general council and director to present this item and he'll be joined later in his presentation by owed. >> thank you director. commissioners, my name is jim

more morales. i'm here to present the building of owed for an amount not to exceed $280,000 broken down into two components. approximately 90,000 ford this fiscal year and 190,000 $190,000 for the next year to buy construction for work force compliance services. pursuant to 1fte full time employee that will be hired and retained by owed to perform this function. i thought i would provide a

brief background on some of these agencies to provide jobs to san francisco residents and then turn to the specification of this mou and then finally to turn it over to pat mull gan , the director at owed. as you might imagine to be able to provide jobs for san francisco residents has been a long paramount of importance and it provides concrete community benefits to people in disadvantaged community that might be displaced by current redevelopment. one way to provide benefits to the people who live in san francisco and live in the project areas was to provide opportunities for jobs created in the redevelopment and

subsidies for the development. this project is supported in the provision that still remains in effect that emphasizes that redevelopment agencies and now successor agencies can provide a preference to project area residents for redevelopment projects. on that basis, the agency over the years has employed a number of devices and mechanisms to try to fulfill the goal of serving san francisco residents who are seeking jobs. essentially these occurred over the years in agreement that we would reach with particular developers case by case project by project that would require san francisco residents to be part of the work force for construction. over the years, the agency collaborated with the city effort which the city also

was very much concerned with providing jobs to san francisco residents and over the years over a variety of programs first source administration for entry levels, jobs for economically disadvantaged. there was a jobs broker required for the office development in downtown to provide a brokerage service for city of san francisco to get jobs and funding of programs and jobs and training programs to provide direct assistance to the individuals interested in getting a job as well as referral or placement agencies. indeed, the redevelopment agency at one time directly funding a number of community bays -- to

provide these services and was indeed in the last 6 years, 5 years, a high priority for the agency to fund directly community based organizations to provide services. with this solution and with the limitations on the agency use of tax increment, these more robust funding arrangements are no longer available to the agency. but what we do have are the enforceable obligations that exist for our major improved development projects each which would require that san francisco residents and project area residents receive first consideration special preference in construction work force created by the projects themselves.

because these enforceable obligations and i'm referring to mission bay south opa, the transbay implementation agreement and hunters point shipyard phase one and development agreement at and the hunters point candle stick point all of these have the requirements although they are slightly in different form because as i said over the years, the efforts of the agency did require slightly different considerations for the san francisco residents. but at their core, each of these obligations requires that 50 percent of the work force hours created by these projects be available to san francisco residents. more than being available that there is

a priority given for 50 percent of those jobs and work force hours to san francisco residents. in more recent enforceable obligations namely the shipyard candle stick point, there was an increased emphasis on project area resident side and indeed in the shipyard obligations for the broader bayview community to get a priority for the construction jobs. so, the way that this mou is structured is that it's an attempt first and foremost to supplement the agencies and obligation and staffing efforts, not to supplant them but to provide what we used

to get through some of the cbo's or other means when we had additional funds. it incorporates in this agreement with owed, the enforceable obligation provisions that relate to the hiring of local residents for construction jobs. those are good efforts. the agency has always maintained a very high level of participation but did not require mandatory highering but rather good faith efforts and as if you look at the document and the enforceable obligations, the mission bay provision for good faith effort is very broad without a lot of specificity. where as the shipyard documents enforceable obligations are the product of much greater thinking and consideration of how to implement those good

faith efforts and the result is a statement of how the good faith steps shall be taken and those are captured in your documents that are before you primarily in exhibit d to the mou and also in exhibit a which is the bayview hunters point employment and contracting policy. section 7 in particular is the provision there that details what the good faith efforts require. transbay and mission bay have a broader goal. the attempt here in this mou is to take the shipyard candle stick point good faith steps and apply them to mission bay and to transbay so there is a

relative uniform approach to administer good faith complains. in determining whether a developer or particular contractor is complying with these good faith efforts we'll be able to use the resources of owed under this mou and the to describe those services, i would like to ask pat mull gan to go into more detail about what the employee at owed will be providing and to give a background on city building in san francisco to promote local hiring in san francisco. >> thanks, jim. commissioners, director. i'm pat mull gan director within the office of economic and work force development. we've been

providing compliance as corresponding employment services for the mandatory local higher since it's inception since 2011 and similar role around the first source obligations since 2007. first source would apply to all our most private development, any projects and excess of 10 residential units or more than 25,000 square feet of local space. local higher would apply to city funding projects. we have been providing the compliance on ocei sponsored projects since july of 2013. we have been providing employment services for a number of the redevelopment agency projects. hunters view since 2008. the third street corridor starting in 2011 and western edition

in 2009. in addition to that we are responsible for compiling the federal reporting for hud section 3 obligations for the associated projects for the mayor's office of housing. so with that, with this mou we will then charge again or this provides a funding source for a rec's specific to provide compliance on these projects. a role that we've been providing to some extent for some time right now. >> thank you. >> questions? i can go into detail? >> are you guys done. we have to take public comment. are you guys done? okay. that was an awkward ending. so the presentation portion. do we

have any public comment on this item. >> one speaker card from oscar james. >> good afternoon director, commissioners. my name is oscar james. i'm a bayview resident of hunters point and the first to serve in the 1970 in writing the original memorandum of understanding. in the mission from the model city guidelines with 54 percent community and hundred percent citywide. we are going to stand by it. we don't care anything about what the city has adopt since that time, 201, we go by what our grandfathers in 1970. anyone who comes in our community is going to do 50 percent

community, 100 percent citywide and 30 percent are minority contractors. my point is this. the people who have been trained through work force development and who have been trained through these different union organizations what have you have been trained as workers. being there is not a lot of work a lot have not been able to keep the union duce. -- dues. i would like them to have the opportunity to continue with the unions and the work force development agency and city to come to a reality. those people have been suffering looking for jobs. some of them are pushing shopping carts trying to take care of their families but they have been through these training programs. it behoves this organization to make sure those people are reinstated into the unions. once, when you come out of a work force

development our city built, they put them in the unions, but then they don't have these jobs and to pay the unions, they kept the union dues, they need that assistance again. thank you very much. >> thank you. any other speakers cards? >> no other cards. >> okay. thank you. i will start with my question and then we'll go around. so in terms of the one fte, can you talk about how that person will work with our grood friend george bridges there. how is that interaction going to work? >> we have a long standing relationship with george. we are already actively working on the oci projects. correct me if i am wrong, george's

role is specific to lbe's where on the compliance position that we are funding right now will be specific to work force goals. so to the goals that the gentlemen just spoke to the goals over all. they will be working. there is some overlap between lb and the local hiring goals and they are separate. they will be working more accurately with the employment liasons which actively work with the public and our various cbo partners towards fulfilling these goals. >> okay. a couple more thing. they would be able to respond to us. we often have request for reports on work with hiring and contracting goals and things like that. so that person would be responsible for providing that information in reports to us?

>> certainly, actually we've had staff that have been attending the local cat meetings regularly to be able to respond to community interest and input on an on going basis and nothing will change and we'll all be available to respond to any questions and concerns from this commission. >> i guess more specifically, there is hiring and other systems, i just want to make sure that this person is in their job description to get us written reports or charts or things that we need, those questions frequently come up here and i would hate to sign up for situations that are difficult for us to get information. >> i will always be available to come to this commission to present that information. >> to the public comment of mr. james, i think that goes towards your employment liaison staff to really work with some of the cbo's particular lau -- the yc to

be able to provide additional services maybe to the people that come out of those programs. before there was a lot of construction going on. >> we are coming off a deeper session and we have some focused efforts specifically ycb has been charged with a role and outreach with recounty -- reconnection with this place and county workers and the return of construction workers and there are resources set add for burial removal and other things of that nature. >> thank you. any other questions? >> yes, on the administrative side of it when you said that the mou would support one fte, my reaction was is that enough? >> well, we have two

additional positions employment liasons which we have been recently where positions will be funded through the on going obligations for the mission bay development group. we do receive some resources through them for these employment liasons. in our office because we do provide these work force compliant for construction projects citywide, there is an economy of scale so we are currently staffing these positions without the benefit of additional resources. we are challenged in that and our office really appreciates the commitment from ocie to see this through. >> okay. great, thank you. obviously this is an area that is very important and when we have so many project areas and with so much construction going on in the city generally i want to make sure we have

enough resources. i would be interested if the commission understood a little bit of the pipeline, street, not street side but individual residents of san francisco looking for and interested in city build and getting into that training. what i understand from chris iglesias who used to be the city build director obviously was organized, but community based organizations and channel through the system. i guess where my understanding drops off is what happens when they get to the city, to that city build program and how are they channeled out to these projects to work and to mr. james question, how many of them remain within the work force of some of these construction companies which is the ultimate goal? >> yeah. it's a pathway. a career path way and that's

how we treat it and our goal is to not get through an entry level position and what was the career path that might open up. to employment services there is two ends to it. there is services through city built and a more seasoned construction worker, a resident construction worker who would be receiving our service and 3120 mission street and they are actively seeking employment for them to inform our office that they want to be included in the list for any of these projects for local hiring provision. the compliance officers roles for the various workers goal identify shortages on various projects and the contract maybe out of compliance for the good faith goals or

mandatory goals which ever they may be and we pass the information on to the liasons and our data list for workers to help meet these demands and goals on-the-job site. we provide on going training in addition to the city built academy and in cooperation with city college to provide skills, upgrade to individuals that might be challenged on some of the demands on the work force. we really see ourselves as a partner in our industry and that way we are providing a service to the contract or base as well. >> just wondering if the employing liasons or ft's are they currently working under owed or these new folks that you are hiring? >> we will be employing new. with th the additional

sources we'll be able to hire an additional officer and with the recs finalized we'll be able to hire two employment liasons. the focus of all of those positions are under ocii projects. >> you will make sure they are up to date with the work force policies that we have? >> oh yeah. and to both the comments from the individual from the public but also jim morales comment deputy director. all of he is the came out of the right hand lane work force policy from the agency. they are varying in some degree and stronger in some manner. but rest assured we are looking for the right candidate for the

construction work force but also the various needs in the community that we are charged with. >> that was a question i had about do you keep statistics on the demographics of the work force? >> if at another meeting i have data on everything. i can break it down by job site. >> there is a lot of nuance depending on the type of construction it is and the breakdown by trade. the one thing we do do and the benefit we have is a lot of data. so, yeah, i can provide that breakdown. >> hopefully we'll get on going but i would like to schedule maybe another workshop to go over the difference in local state and policy and the data we have. it would be great when you do that. >> sure. >> any other questions or