San Francisco Redevelopment Agency


2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 



118-45309-002                                                                                       Agenda Item No. 4 ( b )

                                                                                                            Meeting of April 21, 2009                                                                                         

MEMORANDUM

TO:                  Agency Commissioners

FROM:            Fred Blackwell

                        Executive Director

SUBJECT:      Amending the Model Block Rehabilitation Loan Program to clarify the allowable use of loan funds, establish asset eligibility criteria, and raise the maximum eligible income to 120% of Area Median Income; Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Project Area

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On June 21, 2005, the Commission designated the 1700 block of Newcomb Avenue (the “Pilot Block” or the “Block”) to be the first block to participate in the Agency’s Model Block Program (the “Program”).  The Program focuses on improving the quality of life for existing homeowners and residents of the Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Project Area (the “Project Area”) and broader community.  By combining community organizing with the resources of the Agency, other City departments, and private institutions, the Program is intended to improve the overall health of the Project Area one residential block at a time.   The Program has both private and public components:  the Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program (the “Loan Program”), a rehabilitation loan program for private residential property, and a streetscape improvement program.

 The Commission approved of the Loan Program on April 17, 2007, authorizing a loan fund in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000, with individual home owners able to borrow up to a maximum of $75,000 from the Agency.   The Loan Program is designed to assist residents of the model block with renovations such as electrical, plumbing upgrades, roof and window repairs and replacement, seismic upgrades and accessibility modifications.  Based on market conditions, loan applications and feedback from Model Block residents, staff is proposing to update the Loan Program guidelines to serve the maximum number of qualified residents, and to clarify the priorities of use of the loan funds.  The requested amendments will prioritize the scope of work to be completed with loan proceeds, clarify that loan to value ratios will be confirmed with an appraisal, establish an asset eligibility criteria and increase the maximum income served in the Loan Program.

Staff recommends the Commission amend the Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program to clarify allowable uses of loan funds, establish asset eligibility criteria, and raise the maximum eligible income to 120% of Area Median Income.

DISCUSSION:

Background

On June 21, 2005, the Commission designated the 1700 block of Newcomb Avenue as the pilot block to participate in the Agency’s Model Block Program.  The Program is designed to improve the quality of life for existing homeowners and residents of the Project Area and the Bayview Hunters Point community.  By combining community organizing and empowerment with the resources of the Agency, other City departments, and private institutions, the Program is intended to improve the overall health of the Project Area one residential block at a time.   The Program has both private and public components:  the Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program (the “Loan Program”), a rehabilitation loan program for private residential property, and a streetscape improvement program.

The Loan Program

The Commission approved the Loan Program on April 17, 2007, authorizing a loan fund in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000, with individual home owners able to borrow up to a maximum of $75,000 from the Agency.  The Loan Program is designed to assist residents of the model block with renovations such as electrical, plumbing upgrades, roof and window repairs and replacement, seismic upgrades and accessibility modifications.  Under the current guidelines, the loans would be available at 1% simple interest to households earning no more than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) and at 3% simple interest to households earning no more that 100% of AMI.  All loan payments can be deferred for 15 years, but are due upon sale or transfer of the property.  At the end of the initial 15-year term, the homeowner can apply for a one-time deferral of an additional 15 years.  For households headed by seniors and disabled persons, the loans would automatically be deferred until sale or transfer of the property.

Proposed Amendments

Based on market conditions, applications and feedback from Model Block residents, staff is proposing to update the Loan Program guidelines to serve the maximum number of qualified residents, and to clarify the priorities of use of the loan funds.  The requested amendments will prioritize the scope of work to be completed with loan proceeds, clarify that loan to value ratios will be confirmed with an appraisal, establish an asset eligibility criterion and increase the maximum income served by the Loan Program.  Staff proposes the following changes to the Loan Program guidelines:

  • Eligible Improvements:  Staff wants to ensure that the loan funds are directed towards the most essential repairs and upgrades—those that effect life and safety of the owners and occupants.  The proposed amendment clarifies that loan proceeds are available to rehabilitate privately owned, residential properties on the Model Block in the following order of priority:  environmental and life safety issues, corrections of current code violations of the City and County of San Francisco Housing Codes and/or Building Codes, energy efficiency, water conservation repairs, electrical, plumbing and heating upgrades, roofing, window repair or replacement, exterior painting, and accessibility modifications or seismic upgrades.

  • Liquid Assets:  The current Loan Program guidelines do not specify an asset limit or asset qualification for participation.  It is proposed that eligible homeowners have no more than $25,000 of liquid assets remaining after renovations.  The homeowner’s primary residence will not be considered a liquid asset.  Retirement funds held in any pension account, 401k plan, 403b plan, or similar asset such as a 529 plan or other government approved college savings plans, are also exempt from the asset test.  The proposed asset limit is consistent with the Mayor’s Office of Housing rehabilitation loan programs.
  • Loan-To-Value:  Current Loan Program guidelines specify that the maximum total loan–to-value ratio for all debt secured against the property, including the Agency loan, cannot exceed 95%.  The amendment specifies that the total loan–to-value ratio will be confirmed by a title report and an appraisal.  The Agency will order the home appraisal, the charge for which will be billed to the homeowner unless waived by the Agency.
  • Income Eligibility:  Finally, because of the current credit crisis and the rapid decline of home values in the Bayview community, residents earning in excess of the current 100% AMI income program limit have had difficulty accessing affordable credit needed to undertake home repairs.  To respond to the needs of these residents, staff proposes to raise the eligible income from 100% AMI to 120% AMI.

 

California Environmental Quality Act

The Loan Program is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(a).  The alterations to existing facilities would not have a significant physical effect on the environment.

Originated by Kerri Bock-Willmes, Development Specialist, Vanessa Dandridge, Development Specialist, and David Sobel, Senior Development Specialist

                                                            Fred Blackwell

                                                            Executive Director

Attachments   

A.  Amended Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program

 


RESOLUTION NO. 37-2009

AMENDING THE MODEL BLOCK REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM TO CLARIFY THE ALLOWABLE USE OF LOAN FUNDS, ESTABLISH ASSET ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, AND RAISE THE MAXIMUM ELIGIBLE INCOME TO 120% OF

AREA MEDIAN INCOME; BAYVIEW HUNTERS POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA

BASIS FOR RESOLUTION

1.                  On June 21, 2005, by Resolution No. 112-2005, the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco (“Agency”) designated the 1700 Block of Newcomb Avenue as a Pilot Block for participation in the Loan Program.

2.                  On June 1, 2006, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted the Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Plan (“Redevelopment Plan”).

3.                  On April 17, 2007, by Resolution No. 32-2007, the Agency Commission established the Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program (“Loan Program”) to improve the quality of life for existing homeowners and residents of the Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Project Area (“Project Area”) and to preserve the existing housing stock in the Project Area.  The Agency Commission:  (1) adopted the standards, qualifications and criteria for making and approving Model Block loans; (2) authorized and approved the Loan Program; (3) authorized the Executive Director to execute individual loans and ancillary documents in accordance with the Loan Program; and (4) authorized the expenditure of an amount not to exceed One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) to implement the Loan Program.  The Loan Program is listed as a housing activity in the five year Implementation Plan for the Redevelopment Plan.

4.                  Based on market conditions, applications and feedback from Model Block residents, staff is proposing to update the Loan Program guidelines to:  (a) serve the maximum number of qualified residents, (b) clarify the priorities of use of the loan funds; (c) prioritize the scope of work to be completed with loan proceeds; (d) clarify that loan-to-value ratios will be confirmed with an appraisal; (e) establish an asset eligibility criterion; and (f) increase the household income eligibility based to 120% of area median income.

5.                  The Loan Program is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(a).  The alterations to existing facilities would not have a significant physical effect on the environment.


RESOLUTION

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco that:

The Loan Program is amended in the form attached to this Resolution with the following changes:

1.      Loan proceeds are available to rehabilitate privately owned, residential properties on the Model Block in the following areas, in order of priority:  environmental and life safety issues, corrections of current code violations of the City and County of San Francisco Housing Codes and/or Building Codes, energy efficiency, water conservation repairs, electrical, plumbing and heating upgrades, roofing, window repair or replacement, exterior painting, and accessibility modifications or seismic upgrades.

2.      The maximum loan-to-value ratio for a debt on the property including the Agency loan cannot exceed 95%.  The Agency will order an appraisal, paid for by the borrower unless waived by the Agency, to determine the total loan-to-value ratio.

3.      Homeowners can retain up to $25,000 of liquid assets and still qualify for a loan.  For the purpose of the asset test, the homeowner’s primary residence will not be considered liquid assets.  Retirement funds held in any pension account or retirement funds, including but not limited to the following:  401k plan, 403b plan, or similar asset that is not available for liquidation, such as a 529 plan or other government approved college savings plans, are exempt from the asset test.

4.      To be income eligible, the borrower’s household income must not exceed 120% of area median income adjusted for household size.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________

James B. Morales

Agency General Counsel

Attachment A - Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program


ATTACHMENT A

MODEL BLOCK

 HOME IMPROVEMENT

LOAN PROGRAM

ADOPTED

April 17, 2007

By Resolution 32-2007

AMENDED

April 21, 2009

By Resolution  -2009

I.          Model Block Program - Introduction

The Bayview Hunters Point Model Block Program (the “Model Block Program”) is specifically designed to improve the quality of life for existing homeowners and residents of the Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Project Area (the “Project Area”).  The Model Block Program aims to improve both privately-owned residential property and the adjacent streetscape, while also addressing other physical and social issues raised by participating residents.  The Agency Commission hereby establishes the Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program (the “Loan Program”) to assist homeowners in the repair and upgrade of privately-owned homes on a participating block. 

On June 21, 2005, the Redevelopment Agency of the City andCounty of San Francisco (“Agency”) designated the 1700 block of Newcomb Avenue as the first block (the “Model Block”) to participate in the Model Block Program.  The 1700 block of Newcomb was selected based on the overall condition of the residential properties and the strong desire demonstrated by the Newcomb Street residents and homeowners to work together to address these issues. Many of the homes on the Model Block require code and life safety upgrades, as well as cosmetic work.  Many of the residents lack the income or access to resources to make these improvements on their own.  As a result of the discussions with the Model Block residents, staff has developed a framework for the Model Block Program consisting of a public and private menu.  The public menu includes streetscape work that will help the Model Block by increasing plantings, minimizing storm runoff, and traffic calming.  The private menu is this Loan Program which will provide financial assistance to income eligible borrowers to make improvements to their properties with a related contracting and workforce program to promote economic opportunities for neighborhood businesses and residents.

If the program is a success on the 1700 block of Newcomb Avenue, staff anticipates that the Agency Commission will designate additional blocks within the Project Area as Model Blocks and this loan program will extend to the eligible homeowners in those blocks under the same underwriting criteria.  Through community empowerment, Agency investment, cooperation with departments of the City and County of San Francisco (“City”), and resources from private institutions, the overall health and vitality of specific blocks in the Project Area will be improved.

II.        Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program - Underwriting Criteria

The Agency has budgeted $1,000,000 of its Citywide tax increment housing funds to provide low-interest, deferred loans to eligible Borrowers participating in the Loan Program.  Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33763.5, the Agency has established the following standards, qualifications and criteria for loans under the Loan Program:

  • Eligible Improvements:  Loan proceeds are available to rehabilitate privately owned, residential properties on the Model Block in the following areas, in order of priority:  environmental and life safety issues, corrections of current code violations of the City and County of San Francisco Housing Codes and/or Building Codes, energy efficiency, water conservation repairs, electrical, plumbing and heating upgrades, roofing, window repair or replacement, exterior painting, accessibility modifications or seismic upgrades.
  • Engineering Costs:  The costs of any engineering or structural reports will be included in the scope of work for each rehabilitation project and will be paid from loan proceeds.  Work on secondary units is disallowed under the Program. 
  • The property does not have to be owner-occupied; however, the Agency’s loan agreement must be with the homeowner.
  • The maximum loan amount is $75,000.
  • The maximum loan–to-value ratio for a debt on the property including the Agency loan can not exceed 95%.  The Agency will order an appraisal, paid for by the borrower unless waived by the Agency, to determine the total loan-to-value ratio.
  • Income Eligibility:  To be income eligible the Borrower’s household income must not exceed 120% of area median income (“AMI”) adjusted for household size.
  • Liquid Assets: Homeowners can retain up to $25,000 of liquid assets and still qualify for a loan.  For the purpose of the asset test, the Homeowner’s primary residence will not be considered liquid assets.  Retirement funds held in any pension account or retirement funds, including but not limited to the following: 401k plan, 403b plan, or similar asset that is not available for liquidation, such as a 529 plan or other government approved college savings plans, are exempt from the asset test.
  • 1% Interest Rate:  The interest rate is 1% for households earning no more than 80% of AMI, adjusted for household size.
  • 3% Interest Rate:  The interest rate is 3% for households earning more than 80% of AMI but not more than 100% of AMI, adjusted for household size
  • Term:  15 years with a one-time extension of an additional 15 years, at the option of the Borrower, provided the loan is in good standing.  The Loan is not assignable and is due on sale of the property.
  • Extension of Term for Seniors or Disabled:  Loans to households headed by seniors (persons 60 years of age or older) or the disabled are automatically deferred until resale.  If the Borrower becomes a senior or disabled during the loan term, a deferral can be obtained with a request in writing to the Agency’s Executive Director.
  • Early Termination:  The loan agreement may terminate early in the event of a sale, transfer or uncured event of default.
  • Repayment Provision: Repayment of principal and accrued interest will be deferred until the end of the Term (including any extensions) or early termination of the loan agreement. 
  • Prepayment:  The loan plus accrued interest may be prepaid in full or in part without penalty.
  • Promissory Note and Deed of Trust:  Each loan will be evidenced by a promissory note and secured by a deed of trust and assignment of rents, which will be recorded as subordinate debt. Upon repayment, the Agency will issue a Deed of Full Reconveyance to the Borrower.
  • Subordination:  The Agency will subordinate to other new debt on the property during the loan term as long as a 95% loan-to-value ratio is maintained, and as long as homeowners are current in mortgage payments and real estate taxes.  If a home is delinquent in mortgage or tax payments, the Agency may subordinate in its sole discretion, on a case-by-case basis. 
  • Loan Applications will be considered on a rolling basis.  Completed applications will be funded on a “first come, first served” basis, subject to availability of funds. 
  • First priority for the loans will be given to Agency Certificate of Preference Holders[1].
  • Points:  The Agency will not charge fees or points on these loans.
  • Non-recurring Costs:  The Borrower will be required to pay non-recurring costs (such as preliminary title report and closing costs), if any, which may be paid from loan proceeds.
  • Borrower’s Insurance:  The Borrower shall maintain, through the Term, property insurance in an all-risk form, excluding earthquake and flood, for one hundred percent (100%) of the replacement value of all improvements located on the property, with a deductible not to exceed Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) each loss, including the Agency as a named insured as mortgagee.

III.       Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program – Borrower Must Utilize Services of Construction Manager

The Borrower will be required to consult with and accept the assistance of a Construction Manager.  The Agency, through a separate request for proposals, will contract with a construction manager who will assist Borrowers with such things as: (i) preparing the Scope of Services; (ii) preparing an invitation(s) to bid; (iii) reviewing bid proposals; (iv) reviewing Disbursement Requests; and (v) acting as an informal liaison between the Borrower and the contractor(s) as needed.  The Borrower will make the final decisions regarding the selection of contractor and scope of services.  However, the Agency will only approve loans for projects and contractors that meet all of the Model Block Loan Program requirements.

IV.       Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program - Contracting and Workforce Requirements

In addition to providing financial assistance for income-qualified homeowners on the Block, the Loan Program is structured to help create business development opportunities for small, local contractors.  Under California Labor Code Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 2 sections 1770, 1773 and 1773.1,single family rehabilitation programs are exempt from State prevailing wage requirements.  Due to the administrative and financial requirements of prevailing wage programs, this exemption would allow homeowners to contract with small, local contractors that typically would be unable to participate in the Loan Program.  The Loan Program can therefore serve as a vehicle for small, local contractors to enhance their track record, providing an extra benefit to this investment of housing tax increment funds in the Bayview community. 

·         Model Block Small Business Enterprise Contractors

All work funded with Loan Program proceeds must be performed by a licensed contractor who is registered with the Agency as a Small Business Enterprise (“SBE”). The Agency will create a list of SBE contractors eligible for the program.  To generate this list, the Agency will publish a “Notification of Contracting Opportunities” (“NCO”) in the Chronicle, the Bid and Contract Opportunities Newsletter, the Small Business Exchange and local trade association publications.  Staff will also use the Agency’s SBE directory to notify “B” contractors with business addresses in the 94124 zip code of the Program, as well as follow up on contractor referrals from Young Community Developers (“YCD”) and the Carpenters Union (Local 22). Interested contractors will then be required to attend a pre -solicitation meeting in which they will be given an overview of the Loan Program.

·         SBE Contractor Selection Process

Each Borrower will be required to secure at least three bids for the work to be done on his or her home from Agency certified SBEs, at least one of which must be from a Bayview SBE contractor located  in the 94124 zip code.  Each homeowner will contract directly with the contractor selected through the bid process.

  • Insurance Requirements for Borrower’s Contractor

The Borrower must require all contractors performing rehabilitation work under the Loan Program obtain and maintain the following insurance:

(a)        General Liability:  $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Project or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

(b)        Automobile Liability:  $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

(c)        Workers Compensation and Employers Liability:  Workers compensation limits as required by the California Labor Code and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident.

(d)       Professional Liability Insurance:  $1,000,000 per occurrence.  (Only required if an architect, engineer or other professional consultants are hired by Borrower.)

·         Bonding Requirements for Borrower’s Contractors

Borrower must require that each contractor secure a payment and performance bond equivalent to the amount of the contract between Borrower and contractor.  If a contractor has difficulty securing a bond, the contractor may elect, but is not required to, apply to participate in the Agency’s Surety Bond Program which is administered by Merriwether and Williams.  The Borrower’s eligibility for a loan will not be affected by whether or not the contractor utilizes the Agency’s Surety Bond Program, so long as the contractor satisfies the bonding requirement.  One Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) of the funds budgeted for the Loan Program will be used to provide collateral for securing bonds as needed. Agency staff will provide additional information to Borrowers and contractors regarding the Agency’s Surety Bond Program.

·           Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program - Workforce Program

If the scope of the rehabilitation requires that that one or more casual laborers be hired, the general contractor will be required to contract with Young Community Developers, Inc. (“YCD”) to meet this need.  YCD currently operates pre-apprenticeship programs in the plumbing, electrical and carpentry trades and will maintain a list of trainees interested in being included in the Model Block Workforce Program (MBWP).  YCD will be responsible for ensuring that the workers are job ready and willing to perform a range of entry level tasks. 

·         Minimum Compensation. 

Under California Labor Code Sections 1770, 1773 and 1773.1, single family rehabilitation work is exempt from State prevailing wage requirements.  Each contractor will be required to pay its workers the City’s minimum wage currently $10.77 per hour.  There would be a 35% mark-up on the payroll costs which would reimburse YCD for administrative costs, including the costs of worker’s compensation insurance, making the total hourly cost for each casual laborer approximately $14.54 or $116.32 per day.

·         Goal for Local Suppliers Participation. 

Each contract selected by Borrower must agree to make a good faith effort to purchase 40% of his/her materials from suppliers located in the 94124 area code.  At the completion of each contract, the contractors will be required to report to the Agency his/her performance with respect to meeting this goal.  A database of overall support to local suppliers under the Loan Program will be maintained by Agency staff.

V.        Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program – Borrower Must Attach Addendum to Construction Contracts

The Borrower must attach or incorporate by reference into each contract between the Borrower and a contractor, a binding addendum, in a form satisfactory to the Agency, which contains the above contracting and workforce requirements and such additional requirements as the Agency’s Executive Director or his/her designee shall reasonably require.


VI.       Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program Establishment and Exemption from Certain Agency Programs

Due to the small loan size of the Loan Program, the limited resources of the borrowers, and the Agency’s economic development goals of creating opportunities for local small businesses and workers, the Agency Commission hereby establishes the above Loan Program contracting and workforce requirements and exempts the Loan Program and elements of the streetscape improvement program from compliance with the following Agency programs and policies:  Nondiscrimination and Equal Benefits Policy, Minimum Compensation Policy, Healthcare Accountability Policy, Small Business Enterprise Policy, Agency’s Prevailing Wage Policy, Agency’s Construction Workforce Policy  and the Agency’s Permanent Workforce Policy. 

VII.     Model Block Home Improvement Loan Program – Executive Director’s Authority to Execute Loans and Waivers

The Agency’s Executive Director or his/her designee shall have the authority to execute loans that are in compliance with the Loan Program.  The Executive Director is also authorized to waive, in his/her sole discretion, any condition, obligation or requirement under this Loan Program, if the strict enforcement of the condition, obligation or requirement would cause undue hardship on the Borrower or would be inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Loan Program.  The Executive Director is authorized to amend the Loan Program.  The foregoing notwithstanding, the Executive Director may not increase the Loan Amount, extend the Term or waive the security obligation  (Agency Deed of Trust) without the Agency Commission’s express authorization.


118-36409-002                                                                                         Agenda Item No.  4 ( c )

                                                                                                               Meeting of April 21, 2009

MEMORANDUM

TO:                 Agency Commissioners

FROM:           Fred Blackwell, Executive Director

SUBJECT:    Authorizing a Second Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with Michael Simmons Property Development, Inc., a California Corporation, to extend the term 14 months from May 8, 2009 to July 8, 2010, for the development of 32 low- and moderate- income first-time homebuyer housing units at 1345 Turk Street; Citywide Tax Increment Housing Program

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On April 17, 2007 the Commission authorized an Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (“ENA”) with Michael Simmons Property Development, Inc., (“MSPDI” or “Developer”).  The Commission selected MSPDI pursuant to a Request For Proposals process for the development of approximately 32 low-moderate affordable ownership units for first-time buyers at 1345 Turk Street (“Site” or “Project”). 

In June 2008, the Developer requested an extension to the ENA to meet requirements for site control in order to apply for State of California Department of Housing and Community Development Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods subsidy funds for the Project. The Executive Director exercised his authority to grant the First Amendment to the ENA on June 8, 2008.  During this period, MSPDI successfully generated an additional $1,585,000 in subsidy funds that will be used to meet the 80% of AMI affordability goals for the Project. 

During the ENA time period, the developer has met all of the ENA goals and has also done extensive outreach in the community to attract buyers from the surrounding community.  Despite the effort to control costs, the building and garage cost estimates have come in high.  This second ENA extension is needed to permit the Developer time to explore methods of decreasing the costs of the Project while preserving the ‘townhome’ design concept.  Redesign is also necessary to reduce the size of the parking structure since the Agency will no longer be building parking for the adjacent commercial structure.

DISCUSSION

A competitive developer selection process concluded for the vacant lot at 1345 Turk Street (“Site”) when the Commission selected Michael Simmons Property Development, Inc., (“MSPDI” or “Developer”) on April 17, 2007, to develop 32 affordable condominium units (“Project”).  Since MSPDI entered into an ENA with the Agency, it has successfully applied for and received commitments for $1,585,000 in non-City funds to assist in meeting the Project’s affordability at the targeted income levels.  In November 2008, MSPDI received a commitment from the State’s Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods (“BEGIN”) Program.  BEGIN mortgage assistance loans of up to $30,000 (a total of $960,000) will be available to all the homebuyers, which will carry a 30-year term and 1-3% deferred simple interest, and will be repayable on the BEGIN Program maturity date.  During the initial ENA period the Developer has also successfully secured a $625,000 commitment for Cal Reuse funds to subsidize the infrastructure development costs.

The Developer has worked to preserve the townhome style of development while seeking to contain project costs.  However, the challenges of the townhome design concept has strained the Developer’s ability to reduce costs since it includes multiple buildings which require more exterior surface area to comprise the building envelopes, more walkways and stairwells, etc.  These inherent inefficiencies would not be encountered with a stark design concept of a less attractive single building with a double-loaded corridor.  However, in previous community meetings, it was apparent that a more visually interesting design was preferred as the last Agency-financed affordable ownership housing development in the Western Addition. 

MSPDI is requesting additional time to finish exploring alternative methods of reducing project costs while improving the quality of the Project.  To enable the MSPDI to complete such research requires an extension of the current ENA term. Redesign is also required since the Project no longer needs to include a garage for the adjacent Muni Substation building.  This commercial structure has been transferred to the City and County of San Francisco to establish an adaptive reuse.  Given the availability of underutilized surplus parking within two blocks of the Muni Substation, it is believed that this redesign will not pose a constraint on the City’s plans to restore and reuse the Muni Substation building. The Developer expects to return to the Commission within the next six months with a new schematic design concept that at the least will have a smaller parking structure and will include a design with conventional building construction and a design with an alternative method of construction that may save significant costs.

MSPDI remains committed to preserving the Project’s overall affordability level to buyer households with average incomes of 80% Area Median Income (“AMI”).  Units are expected to be sold to households with incomes ranging from as low as 70% AMI to 100% AMI.  Staff will return to the Commission later this year with the results of the analysis of the two development scenarios along with schematic drawings. 

The Developer has continued outreach activities as recently as February 5, 2009 at the Fillmore Center.  Prior to that, outreach meetings were held in October 9th (general community), and November 8th (for Certificate of Preference Holders).  In addition, the Developer has contacted various employer groups based in San Francisco including MUNI, Department of Public Works, teachers, fire fighters and police officers to inform them of this affordable housing ownership opportunity.  Given the number of inquiries from the public as to the final design scheme, the Developer has suspended outreach activities until a new schematic design is reviewed and approved by the Commission.

Agency approval of the Second Amendment the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262.  The Second Amendment facilitates completion of feasibility and planning studies that will not directly have a significant effect on the environment.  Subsequent actions of the Agency are required for development to proceed.

Staff recommends that the Agency authorize a Second Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with Michael Simmons Property Development, Inc. for the development of 32 units of low-income first-time ownership housing to extend the term to July 8, 2010, 1345 Turk Street, Block 756, Lot 001, within the former Western Addition Redevelopment Project Area A-2

Originated by Michele Davis, Development Specialist

Fred Blackwell

Executive Director

cc:  Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi


RESOLUTION NO. 38-2009

            

AUTHORIZING A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATIONS AGREEMENT WITH MICHAEL SIMMONS PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, TO EXTEND THE TERM 14 MONTHS FROM

MAY 8, 2009 TO JULY 8, 2010, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF

32 LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYER HOUSING UNITS AT 1345 TURK STREET;

CITYWIDE TAX INCREMENT HOUSING PROGRAM

BASIS FOR RESOLUTION

1.                  On February 11, 2003, the Agency Commission authorized an agreement with the City and County of San Francisco (“City”), a municipal corporation, for the acquisition and disposition of the real property located at 1345 Turk Street, San Francisco, California in the Western Addition Redevelopment Project Area A-2 (“Site”).

2.                  On April 22, 2003, the City’s Board of Supervisors approved the sale of the Site (and adjoining Muni Substation) to the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco (“Agency”); approved the interdepartmental transfer of jurisdiction over 1345 Turk Street from the Municipal Agency to the City’s Arts Commission; and authorized the Director of Property to enter into an agreement for the sale of such real property for the development of affordable housing, arts and community uses, and other public beneficial uses.

3.                  On May 2, 2003, an Agreement for Sale of Real Estate was executed by and between the City as Seller and the Agency as Buyer for the sale and purchase of the Site.  Escrow closed on the Site on June 9, 2003.

4.                  On September 1, 2006, the Agency issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for the development of affordable first-time homebuyer units for low- and moderate-income households.  The RFP sought high-quality proposals from experienced developers capable of building approximately 32 units of condominium housing on the Site. 

5.                  By the October 31, 2006 submission deadline, three proposals were received.

6.                  On November 9, 2006, the former Western Addition Citizens Advisory Committee approved the RFP selection process.

7.                  On January 12, 2007, the evaluation panel determined that the team of Michael Simmons Property Development, Inc. (“Developer”) earned the highest cumulative score. 

8.                  At its meeting on April 17, 2007, the Agency Commission authorized the Executive Director to negotiate and execute an exclusive negotiations agreement (“ENA”) with the Developer to pursue predevelopment of the Project.

9.                  The Developer and Agency executed an ENA on June 8, 2007, pursuant to Resolution No. 30-2007, wherein the Agency Commission authorized the Executive Director to negotiate and execute an ENA with the Developer to pursue predevelopment of 32 affordable condominium units at 1345 Turk Street (the “Project”). 

10.              The ENA further defined a series of milestones that resulted in the execution of a predevelopment loan agreement, pursuant to Resolution No. 137-2007, precedent to ultimately entering into a disposition and development agreement for consideration by the Agency Commission after a public hearing, as required by law.

11.              The Developer entered into the First Amendment to the ENA on June 24, 2008, authorized by the Executive Director which provided for an extension of the Exclusive Negotiations Period from the expiration date of November 8, 2008 to May 8, 2009 and revised the Schedule of Performance to leverage State financing for the Project.

12.              The Developer has requested additional time to resolve design challenges impacted by the transfer of the adjacent Muni Substation project out of the Agency’s portfolio as this component had impacted the feasibility of the Project.

13.              The Developer has requested to enter into a Second Amendment to the ENA (“Second Amendment”) for a new expiration date of July 8, 2010 and would like to revise the Schedule of Performance.

14.              The ENA established a series of milestones during an exclusive negotiations period as a precursor to the Agency Commission’s consideration of a subsequent disposition and development agreement.

15.              Agency approval of the Second Amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262.  The Second Amendment facilitates completion of feasibility and planning studies that will not directly have a significant effect on the environment.  Subsequent actions of the Agency are required for development to proceed.

RESOLUTION

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco that the Executive Director is authorized to execute a Second Amendment to the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with Michael Simmons Property Development, Inc., a California corporation, to extend the term 14 months from May 8, 2009 to July 8, 2010 for the development of 32 low- and moderate-income first-time homebuyer housing units at 1345 Turk Street as part of the Citywide Tax Increment Housing Program, substantially in the form lodged with the Agency General Counsel.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________

James B. Morales

Agency General Counsel

107-044.09-002                                                                                         Agenda Item No. 4 ( d )

April 13, 2009                                                                                        Meeting of April 21, 2009

MEMORANDUM

TO:                  Agency Commissioners

FROM:            Fred Blackwell, Executive Director

SUBJECT:      Approving the proposed budget for the period July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 and authorizing the Executive Director to submit the Budget to the Mayor’s Office

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Enclosed is the final draft of the Agency’s fiscal year 2009/10 proposed budget being submitted for Commission approval at its April 21, 2009 meeting.  Request for approval and authorization to submit the proposed budget to the Mayor’s budget Office follows two budget workshops held on March 17 and April 7.  Pursuant to the City Charter, the Agency’s budget for fiscal year 2009/10 must be submitted to the Board of Supervisors no later than May 30, 2009.

Several modifications were made to the draft budget presented to the Commission at the March 17th and April 7th meetings.  Below highlights the most significant changes:

   Cell reference corrections to accurately tie to the summary spreadsheets; highlighting expired or SB2113 Amended Project Areas

   Administration budget includes increases to Commission’s Fees & Related Expenses primarily related to correct budget allocation for KPOO broadcast expenses; increases in reimbursable insurances fees related to SBH and HPSY; increase in Self Insurance Retention resulting in higher claims expected; and accurate budgeting to expenses in Bldg Costs and Telephone.

   Increase Senior Planner staffing from .5 to 1.0 to reflect hiring beginning July 1, 2009

   $100k for website development and overhaul

   $100k for feasibility study and the completion of an application for the Agency to submit a $100 million New Markets Tax Credits Application (U.S. Treasury Department)

   $50k for a southeast sector retail analysis to guide Agency future programs in the Bayview, Shipyard and Vis Valley

   $250k funding for study of long-term management structures and if approved, to provide initial funding for possible trust structure

For your convenience, I am also attaching the March 17th Commission memo that summarizes the budget process and budget highlights that have been unchanged.

Once the final budget is submitted to the Mayor’s Office, similar to prior years, it is likely that additional changes will be made during this process. In the event of any such changes to the budget, the Agency will provide a written memo highlighting any changes from what was approved by the Commission.

Approval of the Budget is not a “Project,” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4) and 15378(b)(5).

Originated by:  Amy Lee, Deputy Executive Director, Finance and Administration

Fred Blackwell

Executive Director

Attachment 1: March 17th Commission Memo

Attachment 2: SFRA Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2009-10

114-4809-002                                                                                              Agenda Item No. 4 ( e )

                                                                                                                 Meeting of April 21, 2009

MEMORANDUM

TO:                 Agency Commissioners

FROM:           Fred Blackwell, Executive Director

SUBJECT:    Authorizing a Personal Services Contract with Community Housing Partnership Enterprises, a non-profit organization, for a term of three-years, in an amount not to exceed $125,000, to provide move-out cleaning and repair services for vacated Agency-owned affordable housing units; All Redevelopment Project Areas and City-Wide

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On February 19, 2009, the Agency issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to provide move-out cleaning and repair services for Agency owned vacated housing units.  Five completed proposals were received in response to the RFP.  The proposals were evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth in the RFP.  Staff recommends the selection of Community Housing Partnership Enterprises (“CHPE”) based on its superior qualifications, proven experience, and proposed budget. 

CHPE is the enterprise unit of Community Housing Partnership (“CHP”), a San Francisco based nonprofit organization that develops and operates permanent housing for formerly homeless people.  CHP owns, manages and/or provides on-site support services at 11 properties, located in San Francisco and Treasure Island, with 755 units of housing for formerly homeless adults and families.  CHPE provides job training and employment programs for their supportive housing residents; the Agency’s unit move-out and repair services will be performed by residents enrolled in CHPE’s Maintenance Training Program.  

The Proposed Personal Services Contract with CHPE is for a term of three years, in a total amount not to exceed $125,000.  The responsibility to cover the cost of repairs depends on the specific contract with the seller.  In some cases the seller may be responsible to cover the costs of repairs; in other cases the Agency must cover the costs.  The fee for each housing unit for which CHPE performs services will be based on a Job Cost Sheet included in the contract.

Staff recommends approval of a Personal Services Contract with CHPE to provide move-out cleaning and repair services.

DISCUSSION

Background

The Agency oversees a portfolio of several hundred affordable homeownership units.  Prospective buyers who meet the Agency's eligibility criteria can purchase the homes at affordable prices. In return, when they are ready to sell, participants must sell the homes at affordable prices to eligible households, or the Agency.  In most cases, the Agency purchases the home to maintain in the affordable portfolio.  The Agency averages 5 to 6 repurchases each year.  The repurchased units are in varying conditions and need minimal to major cleaning and repairs to make them ready for resale. 

RFP Process

The Commission received an Information Memorandum dated February 17, 2009, which provided the opportunity to review and comment on the draft RFP.  The Commission approved

the draft RFP and on February 19, 2009, staff issued the RFP seeking contractors to provide move-out cleaning and repair services for Agency owned housing units. 

The RFP was advertised on the Agency’s website, the City’s “Bids and Contracts” website, and in the City’s weekly bids newsletter.  The RFP was also advertised on a weekly basis, from the time the RFP was issued until the submission deadline, in the San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Examiner, Asian Week, China Press, Bay Area Reporter, Sing Tao, and El Reportero Newspaper. 

On March 6, 2009, staff held a pre-bid conference to answer questions and to review the provisions of the RFP and the work to be performed.  In response to the RFP, five contractors submitted complete proposals to the Agency on March 20, 2009.  The cost to clean, paint, shampoo carpet and haul trash for a typical housing unit consisting of a living room, kitchen, two bedrooms and one bathroom, ranged from $855 to $5,840, with the average price being $2,414.  The proposed cost for the typical housing unit described above is as follows: 

Positive Directions Equals Change, Inc.          $    855

Catmex Maintenance                                        $ 1,678

Community Housing Partnership                     $ 2,650

Reynolds Cleaning Services, Inc.                     $ 2,915

Westcoast Maintenance Service                       $ 5,840

Evaluation Process

The Agency-led selection panel evaluated the five submittals using the following selection criteria contained in the RFP:

  • Prior experience cleaning and repairing housing properties;
  • Overall experience regarding the specific tasks in the Scope of Services and adequate staffing levels;
  • Reputation and track record of contractor in performing move-out cleaning and repair services including references of current and former clients;
  • The contractor’s staff composition, size and fee structure; and
  • Contractor’s ability to provide the level and quality of service desired and to meet the terms and conditions of the Agency’s contract.

The five contractors that responded to the RFP with complete proposals presented a broad range of expertise and fee structures.  A staff review panel interviewed representatives of the five firms.  The summary evaluation of each of the firms is as follows:

CatMex Maintenance 

Catmex is a family owned and operated small business located in San Bruno.  Catmex’s pricing structure was reasonable and the company had the experience needed to perform the work under the contract’s Scope of Services, but the interview panel was concerned that the company did not have a large enough workforce to complete the Agency’s housing units in a timely manner.

Reynolds Cleaning Services, Inc.

Reynolds Cleaning Services, Inc. (RCS) is a full-service janitorial firm located in Redwood City.  RCS’s staff had the experience necessary to perform the job duties listed in the Scope of Services, but the review panel determined that most of the company’s work was office building janitorial services.  RCS’s bid was also the second highest.

Westcoast Maintenance Service

Westcoast Maintenance Service (“WMS”) is a sole proprietorship located in the Bayview/Hunters Point project area.  WMS has provided various services for the Agency since 1989, including lot cleaning, debris removal, painting, general repairs and carpet cleaning and replacements.  WMS has always provided high quality services, but the bid submitted for the move-out, cleaning and repair services was more than twice as high as the average bid received by the Agency.

Positive Directions Equals Change, Inc.

Positive Directions Equals Change, Inc. (“PDEC”) is a Bayview/Hunters Point organization that provides training and rehabilitation services to the area population impacted by alcohol and drug abuse.  PDEC provided a strong proposal and reasonable rates, but they lacked a track record in providing the services as outlined in the RFP.

Community Housing Partnership

Community Housing Partnership (“CHP”) is a San Francisco-based nonprofit organization that develops and operates permanent housing, provides social services, and economic opportunities to formerly homeless people.  CHP owns, manages and provides services at 11 properties for 755 formerly homeless adults and families.  CHP also operates a job training and employment program though its business venture, CHP Enterprises (“CHPE”).  CHPE provides job training, leadership development and supportive employment opportunities for residents of CHP housing.  One of the training programs is the Maintenance Training Program (“MTP”).  The MTP consist of technical training in cleaning, floor care, painting and repair work.  Upon completion of the classroom portion, individuals work under the supervision of a Maintenance Training Program supervisor to experience on-the-job training in apartment turnover and diverse maintenance services. 

During the past five years CHPE has provides unit turn-over services to the San Francisco Housing Authority, Villages at Treasure Island, Iroquois Residence, Alder Hotel, and Plaza East housing development and many other residential properties.  CHPE’s references provided outstanding reviews of their work.

The panel concluded that CHPE’s proposal was the strongest with respect to all of the criteria set forth in the RFP, including demonstrated knowledge, skills, and experience in performing move-out cleaning and repair services, and based on competitive, reasonable pricing.  The selection panel voted unanimously to recommend CHPE to provide the requested services.

Contract Terms and Costs

Based on the selection criteria in the RFP and for the reasons stated above, Agency staff recommends approval of a Personal Services Contract with CHPE to provide move-out cleaning and repair services for a term of three years.  When units are acquired by the Agency, staff will inspect each room of the housing unit and determine what work will need to be performed in order to make the unit ready for resale.  Using the Job Cost Sheet provided by the Contractor, staff will select the services to be performed and prepare a Work Order. Any additional repairs and services not listed in the Job Cost Sheet shall be charged at an hourly rate approved in advance by the Agency.  The Contractor will review the Work Order and determine what materials and supplies will be needed and estimate the hours required for additional repairs and services not listed in the Job Cost Sheet.  The estimate of the hours needed to complete additional repairs and services will be submitted to the Agency in writing prior to the start of work, along with an estimate of the materials and supplies required.

Supplies and materials that require a large upfront expenditure by the Contractor can be submitted to the Agency for prepayment.  Prepayment of the supplies and materials is at the discretion of the Agency.  The total maximum amount of the Contract over the three year term is $125,000.  Depending on the specific mortgage contract, the seller may be responsible to cover the cost of repairs; in other cases, the Agency must cover the costs.  Funds for this use are included in the Agency’s housing budget.  The Agency’s Minimum Compensation Policy and Health Care Accountability Policy, adopted by Resolution No. 34-2009, along with other Agency contracting policies, are included in the Proposed Contract. 

California Environmental Quality Act

The Proposed Contract is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(d), because move-out cleaning and repair of existing, vacated affordable housing condominiums will not result in a significant physical effect on the environment.

Originated by Audrey Kay, Property Management Supervisor

Fred Blackwell

Executive Director


RESOLUTION NO. 40-2009

AUTHORIZING A PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH COMMUNITY HOUSING PARTNERSHIP ENTERPRISES,

A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION, FOR A TERM OF THREE YEARS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $125,000, TO PROVIDE MOVE-OUT CLEANING AND REPAIR SERVICES FOR VACATED AGENCY-OWNED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS; ALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS AND CITY-WIDE

              BASIS FOR RESOLUTION

1.            The Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco (“Agency”) oversees a portfolio of several hundred affordable homeownership units.  Prospective buyers who meet the Agency's eligibility criteria can purchase the homes at affordable prices.  In return, when they are ready to sell, participants must sell the homes at affordable prices to eligible households or the Agency.  In most cases, the Agency repurchases the homes.  The repurchased units are in varying conditions and need minimal to major cleaning and repairs to make them ready for resale.

2.            On February 19, 2009, staff issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) in accordance with the Agency’s Interim Purchasing Policy and Procedures, inviting proposals from experienced maintenance contractors to provide move-out cleaning and repair services for Agency-owned housing units.

3.            An Agency led selection team evaluated proposals from five maintenance contractors that submitted complete responses by the March 20, 2009 submission deadline.

4.            The selection panel concluded that Community Housing Partnership Enterprises’ (“CHPE”) high degree of relevant experience; qualifications and skills of the proposed management team; as well as the reasonableness of its proposed budget met or exceeded each of the selection criteria.  Therefore, the selection panel voted unanimously to recommend CHPE to provide move-out cleaning and repair services for Agency-owned housing units.

5.            The Agency seeks to enter into a personal services contract (“Contract”) with CHPE for move-out cleaning and repair services for a term of three years commencing on April 22, 2009.

6.            The amount of the Contract shall be for a total aggregate amount not to exceed $125,000.

7.            The responsibility to cover the cost of repairs depends on the specific contract with the seller.  In some cases, the seller is responsible to cover the costs of repairs; in other cases, the Agency must cover the costs.   

8.            The Contract is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(d), because move-out cleaning and repair of existing, vacated affordable housing units will not result in a significant physical effect on the environment.

RESOLUTION

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco that the Executive Director is authorized to enter into a personal services contract with Community Housing Partnership Enterprises, a nonprofit organization, for a term of three years, beginning on April 22, 2009 and ending on April 21, 2011, for a total aggregate amount not to exceed $125,000, to provide move-out cleaning and repair services in All Redevelopment Project Areas and City-Wide, substantially in the form lodged with the Agency General Counsel.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________

James B. Morales

Agency General Counsel

450-020.09-002                                                                                             Agenda Item No. 4 ( f )

                                                                                                                  Meeting of April 21, 2009

MEMORANDUM

TO:                 Agency Commissioners

FROM:           Fred Blackwell, Executive Director

SUBJECT:    Authorizing submittal of an application to the State of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development for $14,590,639 under the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program for infrastructure improvements (the “Program”) for Phase 1 of the Hunters Point Shipyard development, and execution of a standard agreement and any amendments thereto, and any related documents necessary for participation in the Program, if selected for funding; and adopting environmental findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Project Area

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 2006, California voters passed State Proposition 1C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006.  The Infill Infrastructure Grant (“IIG”) Program, funded by Proposition 1C, promotes infill housing development by providing financial assistance for infrastructure improvements necessary to facilitate new infill housing development.  Approximately $197 million is available throughout the state for allocation of funds within the current fiscal year of 2009/2010.

The Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Project Area (“Shipyard”) is eligible for up to $30 million in Proposition 1C IIG Program funds for infrastructure improvements.  The Agency is submitting the application in the amount of $14,590,639 for infrastructure improvements for Phase 1 of the Shipyard.  The IIG funding request will help maintain the current infrastructure schedule and prevent the increased costs of site preparation, wet utilities, dry utilities, surface improvements, landscaping, and open space/parks construction from being passed onto future homeowners at the Shipyard in the form of additional assessments.  Current real estate market conditions and increased construction costs have resulted in an infrastructure funding gap of $14,590,639.

 

The application was physically submitted to officials at the State of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) on April 1, 2009.  Pursuant to the IIG Program application instructions, an Agency Commission Resolution (“Resolution”) authorizing the application submittal must be approved on or before April 21, 2009.  The Resolution authorizes the submittal of the application to the HCD for funding under the IIG Program and the execution of a Standard Agreement, if selected for funding, with the HCD in order to participate in the IIG Program.

Funds will be awarded in June 2009 through a competitive process, based on the merits of the individual infill projects and areas.  If funds are awarded to the Shipyard, the Agency will enter into an agreement with Shipyard’s developer, HPS Development Co. LP (“Lennar”) to fund specific infrastructure improvements for Phase 1 of the Shipyard development that have yet to commence. 

Agency staff has reviewed the infrastructure improvements to be funded by the IIG Program and finds them to be within the scope of the development analyzed in the Shipyard’s Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) and its addenda, and that no additional environmental review is required.

Staff recommends Commission adoption of environmental findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and authorization of the submittal of an application to the State’s HCD for funding under the IIG Program for the specified infrastructure improvements in the amount of $14,590,639, and the execution of a standard agreement and related documents necessary for participation in the Program, if selected for funding.

BACKGROUND

The IIG Program is being funded by Proposition 1C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006. Its primary objective is to promote infill housing development by providing financial assistance for infrastructure improvements necessary to facilitate new infill housing development.

Under the IIG Program, grants are available as gap funding for the construction, rehabilitation, and acquisition of infrastructure improvements as Capital Improvement Projects (“CIP”) required as a condition of, or approved in connection with, a Qualifying Infill Project (“QIP”) or Qualifying Infill Area (“QIA”).  Specific eligible improvements include the development or rehabilitation of parks and open space, water, sewer or other utility service improvements, streets, roads, parking structures, transit linkages, transit shelters, traffic mitigation features, sidewalks and streetscape improvements.  Applications can be submitted for either a QIP or a QIA.  Pursuant to Section 306(c)(1)(2) of the IIG Program Guidelines, eligible applicants for qualifying infill projects include for profit, and non-profit housing developers, localities, public housing authorities, and redevelopment agencies.  For qualifying infill areas, eligible applicants include localities, public housing authorities, and redevelopment agencies.  Applications for a QIA must also designate an eligible qualifying infill project within the qualifying infill area.

During the current 2009/2010 state fiscal year, approximately $197 million is available state-wide for allocation by the HCD, of which $88.7 million (45 percent) will be targeted to northern California applicants. HCD anticipates that approximately 50 percent of the grants will go to QIA’s such as the Shipyard and 50 percent will go to QIP’s. Funds will be awarded in June 2009 through a competitive process, based on the merits of the individual infill projects and areas. The application selection criteria includes project readiness, housing affordability, housing density, proximity and access to transit, parks, employment centers, and consistency with a regional blueprint or similar regional growth plan.  Agency staff has determined that the Shipyard IIG Program application scored 240 out of a total of 250 possible points under the criteria described in the Final Guidelines for the IIG Program.  The Agency is submitting the Shipyard IIG Program application under the QIA.

DISCUSSION

The Qualifying Infill Area is comprised of two discrete projects: Hilltop as the QIA and Hillside as the QIP.  The Hilltop is approximately 14.7 acres (excluding open space and parks) and is bound by Galvez Avenue and Donahue Street on the north and west respectively, and on the south and east by United States Navy property.  The site is made up of 18 blocks (1JV, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53A, 53B, 53JV, 54 54JV, 55E, 55W, 56A, 57A, 57B, plus three Agency owned blocks).  The site will provide a combination of market rate and below market rate condominiums and townhomes, plus below market rate apartments. The Hilltop includes 188 Agency affordable housing units.  The Hillside, which forms the Shipyard’s (QIP), contains approximately 7.8 acres (excluding parks and open space) and is bounded by Griffith Street and Crisp Avenue on the west and south respectively, and by private property on the east and north.  The Hillside is formed by 17 blocks (48A, 48B, 48C, 48D, 48E, 48F, 48G, 48H, 48I, 48J, 48K, 48L, 48M, 48N, 48O, plus two Agency owned blocks).  Of the 1,092 homes programmed in the QIA, 447 homes are programmed for the QIP.   The Hillside will yield 92 Agency affordable housing units.  A summary of the Shipyard’s current programming is as follows:

·         Mix of condominiums over concrete podium garages, walk-up flats/townhomes, and low-rise buildings with four stories or lower: including 928 market rate for-sale homes; 164 below market rate for-sale homes at 50 percent AMI and 80 percent AMI; 280 Agency owned below market rate apartments at 50 percent AMI or below.

In addition to revitalizing the Shipyard with new homes and community facilities, the Phase 1 project area will include over 40 acres of open space and pocket parks featuring sweeping and majestic views of the San Francisco Bay, downtown San Francisco, and the East Bay.

Pursuant to the Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Plan, adopted by the Board of Supervisors on July 14, 1997, one of the main objectives requires the Agency to “Provide for infrastructure improvements, including: streets and transportation facilities; open space and recreation areas, and utilities for water, sewer, gas, and electricity.”  Within the Qualifying Infill Area, a portion of the infrastructure improvements, and parks and open space construction has not yet commenced.  These outstanding items submitted in the Agency’s application to HCD, for a total of $14,590,639.

                                                                             

The community and planning process is a vital component to the success of the reintegration of the Shipyard into the social, economic, and physical fabric of the Bayview Hunters Point community.  The Shipyard Citizens Advisory Committee has been informed and enthusiastically endorses the Agency’s application for the IIG Program for infrastructure improvements under Phase 1 of the Shipyard.

 

CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act

On February 8, 2000, the Agency Commission adopted Resolution No. 11-2000, certifying the Shipyard’s FEIR.  The Commission also adopted Resolution No. 12-2000, adopting environmental findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.  Thereafter, the Commission adopted updated CEQA Findings in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 when it approved a number of actions related to the Shipyard’s Redevelopment Project, including approval of the DDA on December 2, 2003.

Prompted by minor revisions to the Project analyzed in the FEIR and pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, Planning Department staff published Addendum No, 1 to the FEIR on November 19, 2003 and Addendum No. 2 to the FEIR on July 13, 2006.  The addenda concluded that, based on the findings of the FEIR, the revisions to the Project would not create any significant environmental impacts not already studied in the FEIR and that the conclusions reached in the FEIR remain valid.

Agency staff has determined that the infrastructure improvements to be funded by the IIG Program are “Implementing Actions” for the redevelopment project that was analyzed in the FEIR and its addenda.  Thus, no additional environmental review is required pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15180, 15168, and 15164.  The submittal of a Proposition 1C application itself is not a project pursuant to the definition of a project contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).  The submittal of the application will not independently result in a physical change in the environment.

(Originated by Thor Kaslofsky, Project Manager

and Wells Lawson, Assistant Project Manager)

Fred Blackwell

Executive Director

Attachment A:            Mayor Gavin Newsom’s Letter of Support, dated March 31, 2009


RESOLUTION  NO. 41-2009

AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA’S DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY development FOR $14,590,639 UNDER THE INFILL INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT PROGRAM FOR INFRASTRUCTURE improvements (THE “program”) FOR PHASE 1 OF THE HUNTERS POINT SHIPYARD DEVELOPMENT, and EXECUTION OF A STANDARD AGREEMENT AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO, AND ANY RELATED DOCUMENTS NECESSARY for PARTICIPATion IN THE PROGRAM, IF SELECTED FOR FUNDING; AND ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT;

HUNTERS POINT SHIPYARD REDEVELOPMENT Project Area

BASIS FOR RESOLUTION

1.                  The Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco (the “Board”) adopted, per Ordinance No. 285-97, a Redevelopment Plan for the Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Project Area (the “Redevelopment Plan”) on July 14, 1997.  

2.                  The Redevelopment Plan established a redevelopment project area for approximately 511 acres of developable area divided into six parcels to facilitate the land transfer from the United States Department of the Navy (the “Navy”) to the City and County of San Francisco for development.  To date, only Parcel A, also known as Phase 1, has been transferred for horizontal development (the “Project Area” or the “Shipyard”). 

3.                  The Redevelopment Plan allows the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco (the “Agency”) to “provide for infrastructure improvements, including:  streets and transportation facilities; open space and recreation areas, and utilities for water, sewer, gas, and electricity,” and “remove conditions of blight in the form of buildings, site improvements, and infrastructure systems which are substandard and serve as impediments to land development.”

4.                  At its meeting of March 30, 1999, after an extensive Request for Qualifications process, the Agency Commission (the “Commission”) selected Lennar-BVHP, LLC, now known as HPS Development Co. LP, as the primary developer (the “Developer” or “Lennar”) for the Shipyard. 

5.                  On June 1, 1999, by Resolution No. 68-99, the Commission approved an Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with the Developer for the redevelopment of the Shipyard. 

6.                  On December 2, 2003, the Commission approved the first set of transaction documents, including the Disposition and Development Agreement Hunters Point Shipyard Phase 1 (as amended, the “Phase 1 DDA”) for a portion of the Shipyard identified as Parcel A-1 and Parcel B-1 (hereinafter collectively “Phase 1”).  On that same day, the Commission also approved the Amended and Restated Exclusive Negotiations Agreement, which sets forth the terms and conditions under which the Agency and the Developer will negotiate one or more disposition and development agreements and related agreements for the remainder of the Shipyard or portions thereof. 

7.                  On March 31, 2004, the Navy and the Agency executed a conveyance agreement (the “Conveyance Agreement”), which is the framework that sets forth the terms and conditions for the phased clean up and transfer of the Shipyard to the Agency.  In accordance with the Conveyance Agreement, the Navy conveyed the first 75 acres of the Shipyard (Parcel A) to the Agency on December 3, 2004.  The portion of Parcel B that is included in the Phase 1 DDA is still owned by the Navy and is not anticipated for transfer to the Agency until 2010.

8.                  On April 4, 2005, the Agency transferred the non-public parcels within Parcel A to the Developer to construct the infrastructure improvements required under the Phase 1 DDA.  On that same date, the Commission approved the First Amendment to the Phase 1 DDA, which included technical corrections and changes that were necessary to clarify the intent of the Phase 1 DDA.

9.                  Because of the delayed transfer of Parcel B from the Navy to the Agency and declining real estate market conditions, the Developer requested additional changes to the Phase 1 DDA.  Therefore, on October 17, 2006, by Resolution No. 141-2006, the Commission approved the Second Amendment to the Phase 1 DDA, which, among other things, removed Parcel B-1 from the Phase 1 development.

10.              In 2006, the voters of California passed State Proposition 1C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006 (the “Act”).  The Infill Infrastructure Grant (“IIG”) Program (the “Grant Program”), funded by Proposition 1C, promotes infill housing development by providing financial assistance for infrastructure improvements necessary to facilitate new infill housing development.  Approximately $197 million is available throughout the State for allocation of funds in Fiscal Year 2009/2010.

11.              The California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) has issued a Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”) for the GrantProgram established under the Act pursuant to Chapter 2 of Part 12 of Division 31 of the California Health and Safety Code, commencing with Section 53545.12.  Pursuant to the Act, HCD is authorized to approve funding allocations utilizing monies made available by the State Legislature, subject to the terms of the Act and revised IIG Program Guidelines issued by HCD and dated January 30, 2009. 

12.              The Project Area is eligible for up to $30 million in Proposition 1C Program funds for infrastructure improvements.  Current real estate market conditions and increased construction costs have resulted in an infrastructure funding gap of $14,590,639.  Therefore, the Agency is submitting an application on behalf of the Shipyard Phase 1 for infrastructure work. 

13.              The application was physically submitted on April 1, 2009, and per the IIG Program application instructions, the Board or Commission resolution authorizing the submittal must be approved on or before May 1, 2009.  If funds are awarded to the Shipyard, the Agency will enter into an agreement with Lennar to implement the infrastructure improvements related to the Shipyard Phase 1. 

14.              Agency staff recommends submittal of an application to HCD for funding in the amount of $14,590,639 under the Grant Program for the following items:  site preparation, wet and dry utilities, surface improvements, open space/parks, and eligible soft costs, such as engineering and design on behalf of the Shipyard project, Phase 1.

15.              Based on the analysis contained in (1) the Final Environmental Impact Report for approval of the Redevelopment Plan, the Design for Development, and related documents implementing the development program at the Shipyard (the “Final EIR”), which was certified by the Commission on February 8, 2000 in Resolution No. 11-2000, and the findings adopted by the Commission on February 8, 2000 in Resolution No. 12-2000, (2) Addendum No. 1 to the Final EIR, published on November 19, 2003, and (3) Addendum No. 2 to the Final EIR, published on July 17, 2006, Agency staff has determined that the proposed infrastructure improvements are consistent with the Project considered and reviewed in the Final EIR and Addenda Nos. 1 and 2, and that the contemplated improvements are Implementing Actions of the redevelopment project.

16.              The Final EIR is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15168 and a redevelopment plan EIR under CEQA Guidelines Section 15180.  Facilitating and completing the Implementing Actions are undertakings pursuant to and in furtherance of the Redevelopment Plan in conformance with CEQA Section 15180 (“Implementing Action”).

17.              Agency staff, in making the necessary findings for the Implementing Action contemplated herein, considered and reviewed the Final EIR and has made documents related to the Implementing Action and the Final EIR files available for review by the Commission and the public, and these files are part of the record before the Commission.

18.              The Final EIR findings and statement of overriding considerations adopted in accordance with CEQA by the Commission by Resolution No. 12-2000 dated February 8, 2000 were and remain adequate, accurate, and objective and are incorporated herein by reference as applicable to the Implementing Actions.

19.              The submittal of a Proposition 1C application itself is not a project pursuant to the definition of a project contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).  The submittal of the application will not independently result in a physical change in the environment.

FINDINGS

The Agency finds and determines that the infrastructure improvements are Implementing Actions within the scope of the development analyzed in the FEIR and requires no additional environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15180, 15162 and 15163 for the following reasons:

1.                  The Implementing Actions are within the scope of the project analyzed in the FEIR and no major revisions are required due to the involvement of new significant environment effects or a substantial increase in the severity of significant effects previously identified in the FEIR.

2.                  No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project analyzed in the FEIR was undertaken that would require major revisions to the FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of effects identified in the FEIR.

3.                  No new information of substantial importance to the project analyzed in the FEIR has become available which would indicate that (a) the Implementing Actions will have significant effects not discussed in the FEIR; (b) significant environmental effects will be substantially more severe; (c) mitigation measures or alternatives found not feasible which would reduce one or more significant effects have become feasible; or (d) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those in the FEIR will substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment.

RESOLUTION

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco that:

1.      It has reviewed and considered the FEIR findings and statement of overriding considerations and hereby adopts the CEQA findings set forth in Resolution No. 12-2000 incorporated herein and those set forth above; and,

2.      The Executive Director is authorized to submit an application to HCD for funding under the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program, in response to the NOFA issued on January 30, 2009, for infrastructure improvements on behalf of Phase 1 of the Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Project Area for improvements including site preparation, wet and dry utilities, surface improvements, open space/parks, and eligible soft costs, such as engineering and design in the amount of $14,590,639; and,

3.   If the application for funding is approved, the Agency hereby agrees to use the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program Funds for eligible activities in the manner presented in the application as approved by HCD and in accordance with program guidelines cited above.  It also may execute any and all other instruments necessary or required by HCD for participation in the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program; and,

4.   The Executive Director is authorized to execute in the name of the Agency the application, Standard Agreement, and all other documents required by HCD for participation in the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program, and any amendments thereto.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________

James B. Morales

Agency General Counsel

 

122-0509-002                                                                                      Agenda Item No. 4 ( g )

                                                                                                         Meeting of April 21, 2009

MEMORANDUM

TO:                  Agency Commissioners

FROM:            Fred Blackwell

                        Executive Director

SUBJECT:      Workshop on the design of the Transbay Transit Center, pursuant to the Implementation Agreement with the Transbay Joint Powers Authority; Transbay Redevelopment Project Area

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the Commission with a description of the Transbay Transit Center program and design in advance of the workshop.  The Transbay Transit Center will be a new, multi-modal transit station on the site of the existing Transbay Terminal within the Transbay Redevelopment Project Area (the “Project Area”).  The Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area (the “Redevelopment Plan”) contains several recommendations on the design of the new Transit Center and Agency staff has been working closely with the design team to ensure that these recommendations are incorporated into the final design.  The Transbay Citizens Advisory Committee (the “CAC”) has also been involved in the process and has had several design presentations and discussions, including at its meeting on April 9, 2009.  As a regional project under the jurisdiction of the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (the “TJPA”), the Transit Center design will not be approved by the City or the Agency, but the TJPA is interested in receiving comments from the Commission and other public agencies and community groups.

BACKGROUND

Transit Center Jurisdiction and Interagency Agreements

The TJPA is charged with designing, building, operating and maintaining the new Transbay Transit Center and associated facilities in downtown San Francisco, including the extension of the Caltrain commuter rail line 1.3 miles into the new Transit Center, and accommodations for future California High-Speed Rail.  The TJPA Board of Directors is comprised of representatives from the City and County of San Francisco, including the Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA), the Office of the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors; the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit); and the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board-Caltrain.

The new Transit Center will be built on the site of the existing Transbay Terminal, which is within the Project Area, and the Project Area is a major source of funding for the construction of the Transit Center.  Concurrently with the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan in 2006, the Agency, the City and the TJPA adopted the Tax Increment and Sales Proceed Pledge Agreement, which pledges all net tax increment and land sale proceeds generated by the development of approximately 12 acres of parcels in the Project Area that were owned (at that time) by the State of California (the “State-Owned Parcels”).  The development of the State-Owned Parcels, which include Transbay Blocks 8 and 11A as well as many other parcels over which the Agency has jurisdiction, will generate hundreds of millions of dollars in land sale proceeds and tax increment revenue to help pay the cost of constructing the Transit Center project.

Also concurrently with the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency and the TJPA adopted an Implementation Agreement, which provides that the TJPA will consult with the Agency on the design of the new Transit Center.  This consultation includes discussions with Agency staff and the CAC, as well as at least one public presentation to the Agency Commission.  This workshop is being held pursuant to the Implementation Agreement and will be the Commission’s primary opportunity to offer comments on the design of the Transit Center before the plans are finalized by the TJPA later this year.

Redevelopment Plan

The Transit Center is immediately adjacent to the new residential district that the Redevelopment Plan will create in Zone One of the Project Area and in the center of the existing commercial district in Zone Two (see Attachment 1).  Therefore, Agency staff and the CAC have been focused on ensuring that the new Transit Center will be designed so that it contributes in a positive way to the larger neighborhood.  The Redevelopment Plan lists the following goals and objectives in Section 2.2 G:

Goal:   Create a state of the art multi-modal transit facility that is an integral part of the surrounding commercial and residential neighborhood.

Objectives:

G1.   Ensure that the new terminal opens to the north and south and includes a highly permeable ground floor design.

G2.   Ensure safe pedestrian access through the new terminal on First and Fremont streets and adjacent to the new terminal on Beale Street.

G3.   Encourage new buildings on adjacent parcels to include pedestrian connections to the new terminal.

G4.   Encourage outward facing, street level retail in the new terminal to support pedestrian activity on adjacent streets.

G5.   Encourage pedestrian connections to transit on Market Street from the new terminal.

DISCUSSION

Design and Development Competition

In 2007, the TJPA held a Design and Development Competition to select an architect for the Transit Center and a development team for the Transit Tower site immediately adjacent to the new Transit Center.  Agency staff briefed all of the proposers on the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan and participated on the Technical Advisory Committee during the competition.  Because it is a private development within Zone Two of the Project Area, the Transit Tower development is being reviewed by the San Francisco Planning Department under a separate process, with participation by Agency staff.

On September 10, 2007, the Design and Development Competition jury presented a final report recommending the selection of Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects as the lead designer for the Transit Center and the selection of Hines and Pelli Clarke Pelli as the development team for the Transit Tower.  The TJPA Board of Directors approved the selection of Pelli Clarke Pelli as the architect for the Transit Center on September 20, 2007.

Transit Center Design

The design prepared by Pelli Clarke Pelli (see Attachment 2) includes all of the program elements required by the TJPA in order to meet the transportation goals for the new Transit Center.  It includes an elevated bus level with a direct connection to Interstate 80 and the Bay Bridge that will be used by AC Transit buses from the East Bay, areas for Muni, SamTrans, Golden Gate Transit and Greyhound buses, and an underground rail station for Caltrain commuter rail service and eventual high speed rail service to Los Angeles.  The architecture is open and full of light, and is environmentally sustainable, with the potential to achieve a LEED Gold rating.

The structural system of the new Transit Center forms a “basket” that flares out above street level, allowing supporting columns to be moved inward and creating more sidewalk space around the building.  The outer skin, except for the roof, is mostly glass, allowing light to penetrate into the main circulation areas.  Large circular openings (or “oculi”) in the roof of the building will carry light all the way down to the underground rail station.

Pelli Clarke Pelli has proposed that the roof of the new Transit Center be transformed into a 5.4-acre public park, which the designers have named “City Park.”  This new park will expand the program of the Transit Center beyond that of a transportation hub and significantly increase utilization of the site.  The park will include both active and passive recreation, water features, and frequent connections to the street-level for ease of access.  There is also the potential to link the park directly to the upper floors of neighboring buildings.  The design team, along with the TJPA and its consultants, is currently exploring what type of retail opportunities will be available in the park to generate both increased activity and increased revenue for the TJPA.

The main entryway for the Transit Center will be facing north on Mission Street, with a grand “Mission Square” entry plaza.  However, in keeping with the recommendations of the Redevelopment Plan, the entire design for the Transit Center is permeable, with frequent entrances and a very prominent southern face.  Outward-facing retail spaces are included on Mission Street, Minna Street and possibly on Beale Street.  The primary retail corridor, however, will be on Natoma Street, facing south in the direction of the new Transbay residential neighborhood.  The Pelli Clarke Pelli design proposes to close off a portion of Natoma Street to traffic and create a pedestrian-only retail corridor.

The design emphasizes improved pedestrian access through the building and connections to adjacent transit service on Market Street.  The bridges across First and Fremont Streets are significantly higher than those of the existing Transbay Terminal, allowing more light to reach the sidewalk where there will be frequent entrances to the new Transit Center and retail spaces.  The TJPA is in the process of designing an underground connection to Market Street from the rail station.

The new Transit Center will surely become one of San Francisco’s great civic places.  As recommended by the Redevelopment Plan, the design embraces the surrounding neighborhood with frequent entrances and outward-facing retail along every face of the building and a prominent southern orientation to welcome the future Transbay residential neighborhood.  Perhaps most importantly, City Park will define the Transit Center as more than a transportation hub and make it a center for many different kinds of activities.

Schedule and Next Steps

The TJPA intends to finalize the design of the Transit Center by the end of 2009.  Construction of the Temporary Terminal, the design of which was approved by the Commission in October 2007, began last year and is expected to be complete by August 2009.  Once bus operations have begun at the Temporary Terminal, the TJPA will begin demolition of the existing Transbay Terminal, followed by construction of the new Transit Center and its single, elevated bus ramp.  The TJPA has divided the construction of the Transit Center into two phases, based on funding availability.  Phase 1 of the program, which includes the above-ground bus station and possibly the underground rail station, if funding is available, will be completed by 2014.  The TJPA is currently seeking the remaining funding necessary for Phase 2 of the program, which includes the 1.3-mile Caltrain Downtown Extension.

Originated by:  Michael J. Grisso, Senior Project Manager

Fred Blackwell

Executive Director

Attachment 1: Transbay Redevelopment Zoning Map

Attachment 2:              Transbay Transit Center Design Presentation



 

ATTACHMENT 1

TRANSBAY REDEVELOPMENT ZONING MAP



 

RESOLUTION NO. 39-2009

APPROVING THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2009 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2010 AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO SUBMIT THE BUDGET TO THE MAYOR’S OFFICE

BASIS FOR RESOLUTION

1.                  In accordance with the California Community Redevelopment Law, the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco is required to establish and adopt a budget (“Budget”) for fiscal year 2009-10.

2.                  The Budget shall be submitted to the Mayor’s Office and is subject to the approval of the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco.

3.                  Approval of the Budget is not a “Project,” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4) and 15378(b)(5).  The proposed action will not change conditions in any redevelopment project or survey area or at any affordable housing site, will not independently result in a physical change in the environment, and is not subject to environmental review under CEQA.

RESOLUTION

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco that its proposed Budget for the period July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010 is adopted and the Executive Director is authorized to submit the proposed Budget to the Mayor’s Office. 

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________

James B. Morales

Agency General Counsel



[1] Certificate of Preference Holders were displaced by redevelopment activity in the Western Addition and Hunters Point between 1963 and 1980 and have been certified by the Redevelopment Agency to have been so displaced.