>>s the regular meet of community infrastructure and. the redevelopment agency for tuesday, september 18th, 2018. welcome to members of the public. >> clerk: the first order of business is item 1, roll call. please respond when i call your name. [ roll call ] all of the members of the commission are present. item 2, announcements. the next regularring scheduled meeting will be october 2nd, 2018. at 1:00 p.m. at city hall rooms 416. and announcement of prohibition

of sound producing electronic devices during the meeting, police advised the ringing and use of cellphones, pagers and sound-producing electric devices are prohibited. please be advised the chair my order of removal from the meeting room of anyone responsible for the ringing of or use of a cellphone, pager or electronic devices. announcement of time allotment of public comments. a number of public has three minutes on each agenda idea unless the commission adopts a shorter period. it is strongly recommended that members of the public, who wish to address the commission, fill out a speaker card and submit the card to the commission secretary. the next order of business is item 3, report on actions taken at a previous closed session meeting, if any. there are no report able actions. the next order of business is item 4, matters of unfinished business, there are no matters of unfinished business. the next order of business is

item 5, matters of new business consisting of consent and regular agenda. first the consent agenda, 5a, approval of minutes regular meetings as august 7th, 2018. and august 21st, 2018. mr. vice-chair. >> madam secretary, do we have any speaker cards for these items? no. >> is there anyone here that wishes to speak on this item? seeing none. public comment is closed. >> a motion. before that i want to mention on page five of the minutes of august 7th there's a small typo for corrections. >> great. >> thank you. i move adoption of the minutes. >> second. >> do we have a first. commission by salas.

please take roll. >> commission members, announce your vote when i call your name. rosales. >> yes. >> scott. >> yes. >> singh. >> yes. >> bustos. four ayes and one absent. >> motion carries. >> agenda 5c a personal services contract with public financial management inc in an amount not to exceed $108,000 related to financial modeling and debt administration support. discussion and action resolution number 37-2018. madam director. >> thank you, madam secretary. this item is a first before you. typically we bring the engagement of a financial advisor in connection with transactions. this time we're requesting engagement of t.s.m. so we can

do extensive inhouse modeling and help with the system and so on and do projections outside 10 years so we can be better prepared for the funding needs with our project. with that, john daigle will present on this item. >> good afternoon. my name is john daigle. i'm the debt manager for ocii. resolution 37, a proves or authorization excuse of a contract with p.f.m., as described by the director. the scope of the contract

embraces the financial modeling and debt administration support and it includes policy advice on debt portfolio administration and investment, rating agency and investors communications. evaluation of debt portfolio management systems, post suran d valuation of alternative financial options. with respect to the last item, i don't think we mentioned it in the memo but a firm cannot present it to us. they have to go through a financial advisor and this is put into effect to keep and protect municipalities from being manipulated into unwise deals.

it puts us in a situation of not hearing good ideas. it would be a good policy going forward to having have an f.a., if only for that reason. otherwise, it's a good time to review all of our procedures and practices. we have some particular modeling needs coming up in the next few years that we can use to help. the contract -- i'm sorry. the selection process, the background is our purchasing policy allows selection from a city pool. the city established its financial advisory pool march 28th, 2018. it remains in effect for two years. based on the criteria of the staff depth and experience and post dissolution tax all occasion bonds and their status

as an industry leader and reasonable pricing, staff selected public financial management or p.f.m. as the best qualified to provide these services. we have, with us today from p.f.m., nick jones and kevin dong. bob gamble, our league representative, is unable to be here today because he is on the road. nick and kevin will be providing a lot of support in these projects. the contract budget is $108,000. we're allowing $20,000 for financial modeling. it's an estimate. data administration support another $70,000 with a contingency of $18,000, which could distribute into either one of those or some other services we may need.

the term of the contract is two years with an optional one-year extension at the discretion of the executive director. with that, i will close my presentation and invite any questions or comments. >> madam secretary, are there any speaker cards for this item? >> clerk: no speaker cards, mr. vice-chair. >> anyone from the public wishing to speak on this item? hearing none and seeing none i'm closing public comment and i'll turn to my fellow commissioners for m any concerns or comments. commissioner singh. >> who has the contract with us before? >> well, we have not had a general f.a. contract. we've always contracted specifically for bond transactions. often those contracts have lasted long enough that we effectively usually had an f.a.

in place. actually their role was supposed to be specific to the transaction. we've used p.f.m. extensively in the past. we've also used c.s.g. advisors recently on our most recent two bond deals. we've used kidahata as well as a co financial advisor for a number of transactions. >> thank you. any other comments? questions? commissioners, i need a motion. >> i move it. >> i second. >> moved by commissioner singh and second by commissioner rosales. madam secretary, please take roll. >> when i call your name, commissioner rosales. >> yes. >> scott. >> yes. >> singh. >> yes. >> bustos. >> the vote is four ayes and one absent. >> motion carries.

please call the next item. >> the next order of business is agenda item 5c. authorizing a first amendment to the option agreement with a delaware limited company developer for the purchase of block 4 located in the trance bay redevelopment project area. on the northern one-third of the block by balance, howard, main and parcel number 37 3739 portin of lot 008 and improving mercy housing as it's non-profit housing development partners, trance bay redevelopment project area, and discussion and action resolution number 38-2018. madam director. >> thank you, madam secretary. commissioners, this item is before you. i think several months ago, we had a closed session where we gave you a status update where we are with the developer.

back into 16, the commission approved an option agreement. expiration date is fastly approaching. october 2018. so what we are presenting before you is a non binding term sheet. we've been discussing and negotiating with the developer for several months. the idea is we can extend the option agreement up to two years and continue to work with the developer and think back to further approval of d.d.a. with that, i know shane heart, the trance bay project manager and jeff white, the housing program manager will be presenting. we have a development partners here with us today as well in the audience. they're going to be around and available to respond to questions. we're excited with what we have before you. we look forward to sharing some of the details. >> good afternoon.

my name is shane heart. i'm the project manager for transbay. our presentation today, we're going to discuss the background for block 4 and then the existing option terms and proposed option amendment terms. jeff white will then discuss the developers' development proposal for block 4. and then we have discuss how the developer proposal fits into the trance bay affordable housing program. lastly, we'll go over the next steps. >> this slide shows you the location of block 4. we also have been there, the location of parcel f. as you will see, parcel f and block 4 are related in this transaction. this is ann an an me an ameniti.

it shows you the parks and retail. some background on block 4, the current zoning is for a 450-foot residential tower, 65 and 80-foot high podium and 50-foot high townhomes. the transbay redevelopment plan requires that 35% of all new residential units in the redevelopment plan area be affordable. many projects that are planned and under construction in transbay, contain less than the 35%. so block four is always planned at the balancing parcel. under the existing zoning, 56% of the block units would be affordable to meet the 35%

affordability obligations. this is a map that shows the existing block four zoning. it shows the location of the buildings and the open space. we're missing a slide here. just to give you a parcel background. the parcel developer is heinz urban pacific and goldman sachs.

it's the same developer as block 4. the purchase of parcel f was conditioned upon the developer obtaining an option to purchase block 4. parcel f is now in the approval process, with planning. it consists of 170 residential units, a hotel and office. ocii has approval rights over the parcel f residential component. due to the high homeowners association fees planned for parcel f, it is the developers' intent to off site the inclusionary housing units to block 4. the transbay redevelopment plan does not allow off siding of inclusionary unit so this will require a variation to the transbay development controls, which must be approved by the commission in the future.

the ocii commission approved the block 4 option back in 2016. the term of the option expires in october of 2018. the land purchase price is $45 million subject to negotiations or appraisal based on the final terms of the deal. the option requires the developer to provide sufficient affordable ain't in block 4 to meet the transbay 35% affordable housing obligation. and the commission must approve the developers' selection of the affordable housing partner for the project. the existing option also provides extensive outreach for c.o.p. holders. it addresses work-force and contracting and requires the

developer to provide community-serving space at below-market rent within the project. since the approval of the option, ocii and the developer have been negotiating terms for the sale of block 4. this includes discussing massing and building heights, meeting and exceeding ocii's housing standards, meeting the transbay 35% affordability obligation and providing community benefits. it would provide of addition alex tensions of 12 months. ocii and the developer have negotiated a non-binding term sheet, which is attached to the option amendment and will be discussed later.

the extension would provide time to finalize the terms of the sale for block 4, including building heights, design, the housing program and community benefits. the amendment also provides language to ensure that all ocii costs are paid for by the developer. also it names mercy housing as the affordable housing partner. i'd now like to turn it over to jeff white, our housing director, to discuss the project proposed by the developer and the transbay affordability. >> thank you. i'm jeff white. housing program manager. good afternoon commissioners, directors. shane mentioned the term sheet as part of the proposed option agreement amendment. the term sheet flushes out the specifics of the proposed project. one of the things it seeks is an increase in height.

the podium is currently at 65 and 85 feet. it will increase the height. the tower height would increase from 450 feet to 501. the term sheet defines housing itself. over all, block 4 will be 49% affordable. there's a total of 713 units. 347 are below market rate units and 366 are market rate. the block four is divided up into really three distinct projects. the first is the podium rental project. the second is the tower condo project. the third is the tower rental project. the term sheet also provides specifics of a community benefits package, which shane

mentioned, and i'll go into detail a tiny bit later. i'm going to go through those three comb phone ants o componet i just mentioned. the podium will be 100% affordable. it's consistent with the over all block -- it's consistent can some of our other transbay blocks like block six, nine and one, where they have 100% affordable podium and we have got a tower that is either market rate or mixed income. the podium financing structure will look like our 100% affordable projects where there's tax credit financing and will be owned by limited partnership that has mercy housing, as the long-term partner. i did want to mention, given these are inclusionary units, although this will look 100%

affordable projects, ocii is not providing any subsidy to the whole block, actually. the podium is 191 units. the podium is going to also take advantage of what is called income averaging. that is a division to the state tax credit regulations that allows a project to have a broader range of affordability. in this case, what we'll be able to do is go from 45% a.m.i. to 100% a.m.i. and the purposes of tpcac the project around average 69% average affordability. it gives us a little bit more leeway to provide both lower income a.m.i. units and moderate

income or higher -- up to 80% of tcak. in the podium, the one bedroom units, there's a certain skewing to make those lower income and that is a result of the c.o.p. survey that you guys -- that we presented to you. where it indicated a lot of demand for the c.o.p. holders are for smaller units. i wanted to mention just based on recent results from several lotteries, we've had some c.o.p. holders that have gone all the way to 120% a.m.i. they've not ablthey were not abt because they were over income. the other thing i want to mention about the podium, given it's 191 units, based on our other transbay projects, we're expecting 225 children in that

project. so this is the second project within block four. it consists of market rate condos on floors 30-47. and there's a mix of one, two and three bedroom units in those market rate condos. the third project is the tower rental projects on floors 2-29. this slide gives you a visual of what is happening in the tower rental project. the top one-third of those apartments, the top one-third, the floors 20-29 will be market rate units. and then floors 2-19 will be 156

moderate income units and those units are affordability from 100% to 120% a.m.i. the b.r. m. will be on floors 2-19 and mixed throughout with market rate units. one thing that i really wanted to note is that in the tower rental, in the b.m.r., we are getting 20% of the b.m.r.s at three-bed roomrooms, i'm pointig that out because the market rate rental units, there are no three-bedrooms, we can look at it as a community benefit. it's really a fantastic addition. so then parking -- i wanted to touch on parking. the parking is at parity with the parking rate units. the b.m.r., consistent with what we've done, the parking provided

is at the lesser of half of the market rate for parking rent at the time where the operating cost of the parking garage. which is less. the b.m.r. unit interiors will be comparable to the market rate unit. they'll be comparable high-quality but not identical finishes. and the tower rental amenities will be equally shared with both the podium residents and the tower b.m.r. residents. so this slide has got a lot of numbers on it. it's meant to point out the broad range of affordability that we're able to achieve at transbay block 4. you can see, i just want to point out, and sort of a

specific a.m.i., so, as low as 50% medium income is $58,640 and then at 120% a.m.i. it's $142,100. these moderate a.m.i. ranges will provide family rental units which in san francisco, have been historically very difficult to finance and develop. of the two, block 4, 140 will be low income and 207 will be moderate income. and in a few slides later, i'll review the over all income distribution in transbay zone 1. pursuant to the option agreement that was approved in 2016, ocii requires an experienced and qualified non-profit housing affordable developer to be a partner in the block 4 project

for the development of the podium. [ please stand by ]

-- the services will be tailored for basically whoever in the group with families and seniors and tailored so it will basically flex over time as the population may change and the project. and there's also a strong intention to connect to the existing services at mercy block six and seven. so now i wanted to step back a little bit and have a look at trend phase one and the affordable housing program. this slide is meant to really show you the overall -- what we're basically doing in trend zone one. we have ten blocks over all. there's going to be a total of

3244 residential units, 1400 of those will be b.m.r.s which is worth noting that's 43% of the total residential units in zone one not two. 10% of the b.m.r.s are already completed and 415 are well under construction with completion date prior to 2020. the chart below shows the income distribution of our b.m.r. units and includes projects completed and construction and planned. and the chart includes block four. so you can see that overall we're hitting 42% of low-income units and with block four we have 27% as moderate income units. i also wanted to touch on the

housing we're creating. this chart shows you we're serving family rental and formerly homeless families and seniors in trans bay block seven and i want to circle back to the community benefits mentioned earlier and go into a tiny bit more detail there's a bucket of community benefits and cop outreach is one of the strong components. the developer did fund the benefit and it will be subject to our approval to maximize the success of c.o.p. holders specifically at block four.

mercy and the developer intend to have partnerships with organizations with proven track record for c.o.p. holders. there will be site holders and robust management and a readiness strategy that will be implemented. another one of the community benefits is the commercial space at below market rate there will be about 6500 square feet at 50% of the commercial market space rate. another thing in the bucket of community benefits is workforce mentoring and capacity building. we're pretty excited about this. there's $100,000 to o.c.a.i. to

study s.b.e. capacity especially in the large projects in trans bay. $25,000 per year to existing technology assistance training program. general contractor selection criteria to require participation in the city's mentor protege program and best-faith efforts for s.b.e. participation and there's been maintenance funding at 0.5% fee on resales of condo sales in the future. now, i'll briefly, next steps including today the o.c.i. commission amendment before you today and then next will be the o.c.i.i. commission and board of

supervisor approval to the redevelopment plan to allow parcel f. to allow inclusionary units offsite and the approval of the amendment and the o.c.i. commission approval of the schematic design and d.d.a. that concludes my presentation. i did want to introduce some of the individuals of the developer team. we have cam falkner and dan isran and chris collins with urban pacific and steve vettel with farrell lebron and kinerly architecture and planning and i may be missing a few people. my apologies. thank you. >> thank you, mr. white. madame secretary do you have the speaker cards for this item? >> no speaker card for this item

mr. vice chair. we have mr. gene. >> good afternoon everyone. i'm oscar james from hunters point. i like this particular project. i do have concerns on are there any units that are going to be set aside for people with disability in these units. also, will there be anything for peoples around that area who are homeless to have an opportunity to live in some of those units also. those are my questions that i'm asking for. thank you very much. thank you, mr. james. anybody else wishing to speak on the item. seeing none i will close public

comment and turn to my fellow commissioners for questions or comments. commissioner singh. >> yes. do we have the list of preference holders? >> i'm sorry, commissioner, can you say that one more time? >> i can't hear you. >> he's asking if there's a list of ser tif -- certificate of preference holders. maybe mr. white can answer. >> pam sims. i'm a senior development specialist in house working on the c.o.p. program in marketing. actually, we work with the mayor's office of housing and community development and together they manage the program for us and yes, we together have a list of the c.o.p. holders. >> do you know the number we

have? >> approximately 900 households. >> [indiscernible] >> it comes and goes because people get housed. >> yeah. we're reporting one to four parking are four units one parking? where do people park the car? >> what was the last thing you said? >> where would everybody else park their cars? >> yeah. >> the podium has a ratio of one to four. they'd be in the underground parking. the v.m.r.s within the tower will have the same parking ratio as the market rate. >> where do we expect the other cars to be?

>> deputy director o.c.i.i. parking ratios are a tricky thing to balance because you have both the parking need for residents as well as the limited space we have but particularly in the dense urban environment downtown like in trans bay. i know staff has presented to you in the past on the many challenges we have in terms of traffic congestion and how to prioritize and transit opportunities along with giving parking opportunities. we try to balance them all. we have been doing a practice in o.c.i.i. typical housing projects of 1-4 as a ratio. we have found that has provided adequate parking. not everyone has a car and in a

transit-rich neighborhood like transbay we found that to be a workable solution. we unfortunately don't have unlimited land or space to build everyone a parking spot. after taking all things into consideration, this is our recommended ratio. >> commissioner: do we have a parking garage around that area? >> there are a number in the downtown area. >> commissioner: i think -- who can be parking for one park >> typically that is managed through a lottery process as well to see what the demand is and it's the typical process of managing parking. >> commissioner: how about street park >> downtown street parking is limited. so there is some but it is a very dense urban environment. so street parking is not on every block but there is some.

>> commissioner: okay. i'd like parking, you know. >> we'd love to be able to meet all needs with projects like this you have to balance a number of different factors. >> commissioner: any other commissioner comments? commissioner rosales. >> i'm willing to defer only to say how much personally i'm amazed and grateful with the coverage you've made to just supply housing for families and units for seniors, homeless seniors, homeless families and folks that need relocating. the homeless adult. just laying it out and identifying exactly what you want to provide and the possibilities and the opportunities are. i'm amazed. i'm grateful for seeing this. >> commissioner: thank you, commissioner.

>> commissioner: thank you, commissioner scott. >> i have a couple questions but thank you for the presentation. i think everyone has done an amazing job in at left up -- least up to now. i want to be clear when we approve this item, negotiations will continue -- >> yes. >> commissioner: and they will continue as long as potentially another year? >> yeah. all you're approving today is the first amendment to the option which would extend the option up to two years and then during that time, we're going to continue to negotiate the d.d.a. designs and we will be coming back to you with both the d.d.a. designs and any redevelopment plan. >> with respect to the approval of mercy, would today be the day

we're granting the approval? >> yes. >> commissioner: and with respect to the height issue -- no? >> no. >> commissioner: because there's a process it needs to go through in order to do that. >> we'd need to get a redevelopment plan amendment to increase the height and come back to the commission for approval. >> commissioner: with respect to the height, i looked at the table here, exhibit a, and if it's there i didn't see it quickly. i'm assuming these height -- the new height recommendations is -- from my perspective, not inconsistent with what we're seeing in trans bay today. >> correct. the building heights go over 1,000 feet. what we found previously going through the amendment process for block one, the city's most concerned with the tapering of

the skyline with salesforce tower up to rincon and have done studies and shown it's from the saddle area at 101 feet. >> commissioner: so within the district the height limit is also consistent with those buildings or is this something new? >> right now the zoning is 65 and 85-feet heights and we'd need to increase the podiums to 85 feet up to 150 feet. >> commissioner: is there another development similar to that new height? >> not within trans bay. >> commissioner: so this would be a first? >> yeah. >> commissioner: okay. obvious there's benefits i just want to be clear on that.

so because of the benefits because of the community benefits i would agree with that. i love the capacity studies for s.b.e.s. i think it's critically important. we said that many times to understand why our small businesses tend not to do as well in the high rise development as made in hunters point. i had an issue -- not an issue but a question on the outreach not on the certificate of preference holders because i think that's well covered but in the new area for the moderate income renters. do we have history doing that? i'm assuming the city or we have had outreach to the 100 to 120 a.m.i. group? >> that's a great question.

as far as home ownership we do have experience in that. of course, this is moderate rental and the city has experience doing that. o.c.i.i., to my knowledge, we really don't. so that is kind of a new territory for us. we certainly have at least several years to work with marketing and the best way to outreach and we are tracking c.o.p. holders who are in moderate income range and we did place at least one in the project in mission bay and that went up to 90% meeting area income. that is an example where we know c.o.p. applied and didn't make it in and kept track of them and made sure they knew of the opportunity when it came along.

>> what i would be interested in as being part of or listening in or as a commissioner, we talked about marketing for all the other groups and think we have done a good job the c.o.p. job inform the c.o.p. holders but in the marketing outcomes and on the other items i noticed, if i'm remembering correctly in the franklin street development, there appeared to be many more interested parties. something like two-hundred-something folks and the one in the shipyard yielded less interest and i was puzzled by that. maybe we need to do something different for trans bay. i don't know how many c.o.p. holders or certainly moderate income holders or renters would be interested in trans bay and i'd love to be part of a creative process on how we reach those folks because i can see there being a lot of demand.

>> absolutely. we can roll something out for you. >> commissioner: thank you. and the other item i was interested in and i want to know if we've given thought to what it may look like in terms of a process? >> we haven't and that's going to be happening as we negotiate the d.v.a. those where my questions. >> commissioner: thank you commissioner rosales. i have a couple comments and questions for the developers. we just finished topping off the warriors arena and as everybody

knows i'm not a sports fan so it was nice but what really excited me about the project was the way it reached out to the community and the way it moved the numbers of minority women-owned businesses in the professional services up and the way it hired local people. i told rick welte this was an investment in his own future if he wants to do development because when do you that kind of work and outreach, we're more in favor of supporting projects. i throw it out as a model you can hopefully follow about hiring local people, local businesses, local construction firms to do the work. so that's that. along with the certificate of preference holder comment that commissioner rosales talked

about, it saddens me we get people through a process and then because they make a little bit more money or a little bit under that they're disqualified from being able to move into these units because of finances. remember back in history when redevelopment kicked out many of the african americans in the western edition, they didn't base it on finance, they just did. i think we really need to think about if we're looking at being fair and making things right by what the old, old redevelopment agency did, we may have to look at those numbers. because again, people were not kicked out of san francisco because of their income. now it seems as if the income is stopping them from coming back. so that could be above the a.m.i. or below. i think we really need to think about that and whether we talk

to the mayor about pushing something through with partners and the board of supervisors but we have to make it right. so i throw this out there and hopefully we can follow-through on that, madame director. second, i remember when we talked about fixtures. just because you're poor doesn't mean you should have less quality. i would really urge the developers to figure out how to have some equity there in the fixtures. and actually i would like for us to approve when the materials -- you guys come and show us the materials, i'd like to see the fixtures as well because i, again, because you're low income doesn't mean you deserve less and quality fixtures helps in the long run.

you get what you pay for and so we hope that we would have some fixtures that everyone could be proud of providing people in both market rate and below market rate. second thing on that topic is entrance. i will not support this at all. if there's a separate entrance for below market rate versus market rate. new york has done that. we don't believe in second-class citizens here in this city and would not support a build a separate entrance and -- building with a separate entrance and plead to my commissioners to not do that. i throw that out there as another thing to consider. parking. we have a number of one and two and three bedrooms. most often two bedrooms and three bedrooms and four and five

bedrooms have multi-generational families in there. grandparents living with their kids who have their kids and sets up a wonderful dynamic because i remember when my grandparents lived with us it was cool because grandparents love to spoil the grand kids. usually, when you have that dynamic of different generations, you need a car. so i would ask that staff take a look at the units that have more bedrooms in it to look at how we can figure out how to get those cars ed with those because -- associated with those because most often you're looking at senior citizens living with their kids and you need a car. you can't ride a bike with a bunch of people. i hope we can be thoughtful about that. the last thing -- mercy housing

has done a great job on working on buildings here in san francisco so i'm pleased with that. hopefully we can follow-up on staff with these. >> it's not germane to this subject but i haven't heard recently about our progress on grocery stores in the trans bay -- >> it is scheduled for a future meeting. >> commissioner: perfect. i see if we're anticipating 225 kids i think we need affordable food as we've seed many times and the -- we've said many times. i want id noted on the record we have parks in the area and i'm assuming some of those parks also have playgrounds. >> great.

thank you, staff. with that staff is there a motion to approve or not to approve this item? >> i move approval. >> i second that. >> commissioner: commissioner scott seconds. madame secretary, please take roll. >> clerk: commission members announce your vote when i say your name. [calling roll] mr. vice chair the vote is four ayes, one absent. >> commissioner: motion carries. madame secretary call the next item. >> clerk: agenda item 5d authorizing pursuant to the transportation agreement a memorandum of understanding with the city and county of san francisco acting through its department of public works for design and project management services in an amount not to exceed $3,898,316 in a term

sending september 18, 2021 for the trans bay terminal caltrain downtown extension final environmental impact statement and environmental report and the final impact report transit senator district plan and tower. both programs is adequately described in the e.i.r.s for the purpose of the california environmental quality act trans bay redevelopment area resolution number 39-2018. mada madame director. >> commissioner: thank you, madame secretary. benjamin brandon will be presenting on this item. this is block three. this is part of the temporary terminal and this is just a preview. it's the second part will be building as o.c.i. the developer and this is an m.o.u. we're proposing to select public works to provide engineering and project management services.

with that i'll send it over. >> good afternoon, vice chair bustos and executive directors. i'm here today to seek the approval of a memorandum of understanding with san francisco public works in the amount of 3,895, 613 and representing is my colleague project manager kathleen o'daye. i'd like to begin with some context regarding the trans bay redevelopment area. as you're aware the plan divided it into two zones. o.c.i.i. oversees development of zone one and the san francisco planning code governs in zone two. block three, the block in question for trans bay park is highlighted in the center right middle of the screen in math --

magenta and sandwiched in between block four to the north and block two to the south. o.c.i. is response in for development of trans bay one infrastructure and parks and we do this by partnering with city agencies for their services. trans bay park's story begins with the very -- vee -- redevelopment plan and the detail detailed open space improvement for the district and in 2006 the commission approved the trans bay redevelopment area and open spacing and established the project areas designate and proposed open spaces.

[stand by]

>> the schematic design of transbay park will be entirely different than what you see here, but it will be very much based on what the community desires. the park area is slightly over one acre in size, and it will feature a community informed design. it will serve district residents, commuters, office workers, and visitors. the project goals include incorporating a children's playground to serve the new families in the district and include active recreation and passive open spaces. finally, the public works design team will approach the

park's composition with sustainability in mind, staff will be back before the commission to request the design's approval. it is important to highlight that public works's design and architecture team is the lead architect on the park. public works has deep experience designing parks throughout san francisco. some of the more recent examples include cayuga park in the outer mission neighborhood. this park was actually codesigned by my colleague, kathleen o'day, and lizzy hirsch. this park was completed in

2013. here we see the remodelled joe dimaggio park, and this was completed in 2015. and finally, the renovated lafayette park in pacific heights, which public works designed and completed in 2013. public works other scopes of work under the m.o.u. include public outreach regarding the park's design, cost estimation, project management services, managing the work of other city agencies, including sfmta and ensuring that all park related contracted comply with ocii's s.b.e. policies. finally, public works will manage construction of transbay