the owner's and the managers about earthquake preparedness >> and don't take the easy answer, oh, our building is safe it was designed to code. that is not the right answer, ask the tough questions and see if you can get a report that has been given to you. >> what is the right question? will i be able to stay in my home after the expected earthquake? is that a good question to ask? >> yeah, you may be more specific if you talk to the owner, if it is not a recent building, if it is ten or 20 years old see if they had an inspection done and there you will have a written before that will tell you all about the structure. >> thanks, pat. >> thanks, harvey. and thanks david for joining us and thank you for joining us on this is is special meeting of the san francisco community

investment & infrastructure commission the successor to the redevelopment agency for september 12, 2014. it is 1223 ma'am, secretary. commissioner mondejar. commissioner singh. commissioner chairperson rosales all members are present the next is nominates the next regularly schedule meeting on tuesday october 7th at 1 o'clock at student the please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. please be advised that the chair may order the removal from the meeting room meeting room responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone, pager, or other similar sound-producing electronic devices.

c announcement of time abnormality for public the public may have up to 3 minutes to spank it itself strongly recommended that members of the public who wish to address the commission please fill out a card and the next order of business report open actions taken at a previous closed session no reportable actions and next matters of unfinished business none item 5 matters of consent agenda 5 a approval of the meets minute on august 14th authorization of the hearing officer engineers inc. to expand the scope of services and so

there the amount by $50,000 for phase one of the hunters point shipyard including but not limited to $100,000 the hunters point shipyard action resolution number 75 r507 item 5 c authorizing an amendment for the personal inc. hearing officer to expand the public services and to increase the contract amount by $74,000 for phase two of the hunters point shipyard and candle stick point not to feeding succeed $24,000 and bayview hunters point action resolution number 762014. item 5 b is being removed to the regular agenda and 57 d the

memoriam through the planning department to extend the term of the memorandum of understanding from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 to increase the budget not to exceed 25 how did dollars not to exceed 2 hundred and 65 thousand dollars for the design of environmental review for the warriors project action 2014. madam chair >> thank you. do we have any speaker cards from the members of the public. >> no speaker cards. >> we'll close public comment at this time. >> our consent agenda other than the minutes. >> through the chair commissioner singh items placed

on consent through the agenda setting are typically round and a.d. administrative in nature they don't determine the in light of the matters open the agenda those are typically routine and dollar amounts associated with the contracted there's no property tax that is flowing through the contract. >> who is paying this not the - >> there are a variety of other third party's paying for each the contracts. the first two are grumentd by itself shipyard developer lenore for the property first amendment with the hawk contract the other item with the sfapt >> who are the people ad hoc. >> certainly will the engineers

from hawk engineering please stand. >> did they have any business with us before. >> they have over the course of the last 10 years not only on the shipyard project they've provided services for the ocii but the department of public works and representatives from the public works i see bayer are a who is here where hawk provides support is here. >> okay. the next one item d. >> item d will be presented on the regular agenda. >> okay pause their difference from the regular agenda. >> it's pulled and now in the regular agenda d but also e do i

have any questions go commissioner singh on the cds consent calendar. >> one is consent and one is not. >> i think d - and not to be heard and absolutely. >> commissioner singh wife requested that item d be presented due to a tip a great deal of error in the publication of the resolution title i the agenda title we would like to make that clear on the public records through a presentation by staff what exactly is proposed. >> do we have any other questions from staff or commissioners we'll take all of those items together as part of the consent calendar with the expectation of 5 d that's been removed do i have a motion by my

- thank you commissioner mondejar. do i have a second? and yes >> thank you. commissioner singh has seconded the motion >> commissioner mondejar. commissioner singh. commissioner chairperson rosales. madam chair the vote is 3 i's >> thank you next item, please. >> the next order of business regular agenda authorizing the execution of a modification to the security services cooperative agreement with the u.s. department of the navy over the navy owned land at the hunters point shipyard that wants to extend the term until it's transferred to the chronically con variances alternate whichever is sooner to sell navy owned parcels as stewart set forth and two the

cooperative agreement expenditures through the annual budgeted without more action paid for by the navy discussion and resolution 2014. make director >> thank you madam secretary and welcome to the members of the public thank you so much for that joining us you've heard there was an error in the publication of both the resolution and the agenda title sole welling we wanted to clarify the actions we're asking the commission to take. keep in mind also these securities services are all paid for by the navy the navy pays for the full costs of the security services there the cooperative agreement with that, i'd like to ask 30th to present the clarification on the item >> thank you director bohe i'm

the project manager for the hunters point shipyard the item before you director bohe has asked for the correction for the approval. the subsequentially the resolution is approving the cooperative agreement been the infrastructure and the mother and father a change of the terms of the agreement to remove the 5 year term that expires in october of this year and makes it expire when the last conveyance agreement or the navy transfers other parcel transfers whichever of those say the soonest is the expiration trigger 0 is removes the 5 year limit it commit the navy to provide 3 hundred thousands of funding for the next 12 months

months for security and the clarification is separate but the commission is authorizing the executive order for future modifications for the cooperative agreement is as long as those are approved if the occ budget will reduce the runt second approval that is otherwise required the security services at the shipyard are funded by itself navy and lamar they have a small portion approximately 23 percent of the costs no ocii funds involved this allows the funding for the navy's portion of the services and allows ocii to pass throats fund for the lenore shipyard so the corrected resolution makes it clear that the modification only changes the terms and authorizes the budget and that

the resolution in the resolve clause it authorizes the executive order to approve future modifications as well as those are included in the ocii budget, of course, this commission approvals. madam secretary do we have any public comment and to speaker cards >> no, i move this item. >> it's been we have a motion and a second. commissioners commissioner singh. president director murray. commissioner chairperson rosales. madam chair the veto is 3 i's >> thank you matter passes next item, please. >> the next order of business authorizing the transbay implementation agreement the chondroto execute a negotiation

with a joint liability company between the illinois corporation and the john company by a proposed commercial project on block 5 portion of lot 25 and portion of lot 27 on howard street transbay redevelopment project discussion and act 2014 madam director. >> commissioner i'm sure you're aware of our agreement with the transbay joint powers authority requires ocii to dispose of certainty public parcels in the transbay project area you've seen a number of parcels 0 come before you we've disposed of the residential project this is the first office project you've seen come before you an informational

memorandum to select the team about a months ago but this is the exclusive agreement for our consideration that lays out the timing with that, courtney please present this item. >> good afternoon, commissioners and director bohe i'm the ac acting manager i'm joined by the lock team who flew out from chicago if you guys want to stand up to we can great. thank you. block 5 is one of the state

owned parcels if the transbay project area that ocii is presented e prepared to sell into a trust account for an account the parcel is on howard street between main and beale street for a hundred and 50 foot office tower the only one in this project area. as you can see in this diagram it's oddly shaped 20 with two parcels on one side because they couldn't come to terms and a an rvp was developed for m-1 and m-3 required the open space. on april 2nd of this year ocii

opened a question the proposes o proposals were due on june 25th, 2014, the teams were asked to submit the concept proposal and a plan to meet or exceed occ ociis workforce they were look at by a panel by the ocii learning post who is here and a representative from the tjpa deborah and a representative from the sfapt input was received from the staff and the architect planning department and a real estate xhountd firm. this selection be looked at the proposal and interviewed the team and based on the criteria outlined in ross mirkarimi the selection team scored it

comprised of the john dot company and r.c. architects they've approved the selection on the august meeting they've reiterated the configurations of the ground floor. so prior to coming to you for the xylophones i'll discuss shortly will go to the cac the selection criteria was heavy weighed by the $172.5 million the next is boston property at approximately one hundred and 35 thousand and kilroy had a a proposal they've received the scores for the - they have

significant experience the team was happy about the including the killing e kilroy group. the proposal from the team included a purchase price of $145,000 approximately 5 hundred and 65 thousand square feet of office space and includes 15 thousand square feet of publicly open space a ground parking facility and streetscape improvements on thomas street and ground floor retail space of 5 thousand dollars square feet space and a certification of sustainability. while the good neighbor policy i think team had the highest score

on development but the ground floor on the massing needs to be improved on to make a positive contribution based on the review the gun control i think team have begun working on the project and returned to the commission if the commission approvals this item i want to show you a few rendering to give you a general idea of what this building will be like and the things we like about the proposal this is views from the north and south we like their sky balconies and those will continue on to the next phase since they were one of the positive things that the staff really liked. this is am image of the ground floor. and this is a peak of what

you'll see next month on the left is beer their ground floor plain in the proposal and the right is an idea for the ground floor that we've seen to date it increases the amount of retail space and decreases the lobby and the curb cuts along the street and activates this street. the dna includes the seven months term to expend up to 6 months and an deposit of 5 thousand dollars to cover staff and legal costs $5.2 million and to participate in the special assessment district cv d and to ply with the ocii policy. as discussed the team will return to you with a design next month and the project will go through the plan process and the

allocation process with the approval of the d c a and the seismic designs excuse me. the anticipated to come before you in march 2015 and closing in 2015 with the construction closing therefore. i with the democrat team if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them thank you >> before we treason questions my public speaker cards. >> no one. >> not many members of the public wish to speak. any questions from the commission >> yes. >> thank you. commissioner singh >> yeah. i want to know in chicago who is the expeditecy in california or san francisco? >> yes. the gun control i

think team is under construction on the first market rate block transbay block 6 there's the developer selected at 413 on their construction. >> i have one more question. $172 million 5 hundred thousand why only 5 hundred thousand is enough for the project why not 10 percent >> we based it on a realistic estimate of staff and legal costs to cover the period from now for the d b.a. >> it's nothing incarcerated to, you know, $172 million is that the beacon and it's the $500,000 deposit is more than we required on the other development parcels. >> that big i mean

$172 million. >> the development - the sale price has varied but the work that is required to get the project through the approval process is similar between the blocks so - >> okay. >> commissioner mondejar. >> i have a question there was a concern about the urban design initially you said they have the least points can you expand further about that. >> sure in the attachment two i believe of our august 5th memo a detailed analysis the design done business owner by an architect at the sfapt the main thing we wanted them to have a cohesive story we liked did

elements they were things we thought could be approved upon and look at it holistically like i said on the ground floor they have h had a couple of loading docks and driveway we've asked them to reduce their retail space and that helps to activate the neighborhood and put more thought into the skin of the building so it differentiates itself and relates to the neighborhood at the same time. >> on slide 10 this is the new design that was prospered. >> no all the renderings are from the proposal except the ground floor plain that shows the january and the september clearly land january and september ground floor plain the

rest of the proposal we're in the development process working with their team on a direction so we can bring the imply conceptual designs back next month. >> thanks. >> i have a question perhaps for the executive director this is the first rfp that was identified; is that correct? >> yes. that's correct. >> i want to note that all of the competitors i'm pleased pleased to see that all of the competitors had a workforce in contracting team metabolizes added so in that the concern i think of the t tjpa had the mixing, if you will, the

possibility of the high bid interest was basically just that a concern and it does not pan out as a problem so i commend all the teams is someone from butler enterprise here? >> thank you. so those are my only comments i think we're going to see this again soon so we'll probably have no more questions >> i wanted to note they've done everything for the contact through the i want to talk to josh. i want to know they're meeting all the requirements towards the contract >> yes. commissioner singh. the workforce plan identified butler enterprises we're working closely with butler and the gold

i think team to insure we in good faith meet but exceed the expectations like commissioner chairperson rosales said this was the first to go out and we're going to work closely with the developer they've committed on block 6 to work with us and we're looking forward to working with them on this project >> okay. thank you. >> thank you. are there any other comments from the audience or the commission? i'd like to entertain a motion >> i move that. thank you commissioner singh is there a second >> commissioners. commissioner mondejar. commissioner singh. commissioner chairperson rosales. madam chair the vote is 3 i's >> thank you. next item

>> the next order of business j for the transbay development plan on affordable housing requirement as it applies to the mixed neighborhood project on fremont street subject to approval by the board of supervisors in the city and county as the protective body to the san francisco redevelopment agency and 30 years a payment to the association agency for the use of supporting it project in the transbay area and resolution number make director. >> commissioners the one 81 fremont project is in zone two automotive designated that to the department so you know the transbay district has an unpredicted goal of 31 percent

of affordable housing in the district that satisfactory the inclusivey there's an mixed neighborhood project we believe that will create an undue hardship for the blow market rate homeowners with that, i'd like to ask courtney acting project manager for transbay. >> lots of bays to present this item. >> hello, again commissioners i'm courtney the acting project manager for transbay i'm here to request a variation for a project in the redevelopment on fremont street i'm joined by the project manager jay.

that's - (laughter) >> we're san franciscans. >> yeah. thank you. the project is located on fremont street north even if howard street adjacent to the transbay transit center as well as assembly bill requires that 35 percent of the residential unit in the transbay area be made affordable to low to moderate homeowners and with the stand alone unit and 15 on site 14 percent affordable housing on all resident projects in the zoned area. the redevelopment plan gives the commission the permission to meet the affordable housing requirement if it results in practical hardship