Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    July 17, 2010 12:30am-1:00am PST

1:30 am
are at or below the median income of $74,000 a year, which provides significant opportunities for workers with varying skills and economic -- educational levels. eupepsia there are opportunities for personal care and service. -- you can see there are opportunities for personal care and services. there is a diverse range of employment opportunities we project based on the land use
1:31 am
mix and what we anticipate those industries to look like on an occupational basis. the sox about the economic impact associated with -- this talks about the economic impact associated. we have a model but we rahman to determine -- that we run to determine employment as well as gross city product, so in addition, a 11,000 or 12,000 direct jobs we are anticipating, there are another 13,000 indirect jobs that would also be attributed to the project, which would expand the
1:32 am
permanent base by about 1 1/2%. once the project is occupied, it will contribute about six and a half million dollars to the rose sudeep project -- gross city project. additional impacts will be generated by the 10,500 new housing units as well as in the stadium. we calculated the spending by those households. we are anticipating about to under $90 million a year, and retail spending -- $290 million a year and retail spending.
1:33 am
additional spending will be generated. this final slide summarizes the impacts are just discussed for the stadium and to non-stadium alternatives broken down by impact in the construction phase. you can see the total of 2100 with about 1500 of those projecting -- representing construction trades. the direct employment is 11,000 or 12,000 people plus an additional 12,000 or 13,000. annual wages of about 12,000 or so employees will generate more than $1 billion per year.
1:34 am
those residents will spend about $290 million a year, and in addition, the stadium spending will generate another $15 million a year. finally, we did a brief analysis of the property tax increment that was anticipated to be generated based on the finished value. that averages around $11 billion on completion, and what we did was look if the amount past through the general fund and school district and set aside and so forth and calculated at about $5 million on average.
1:35 am
this includes time there is not any value being generated, so that is an average over that time, and that concludes my presentation, and i am here to answer any specific questions. >> thank you. >> supervisor maxwell, to some of the actions before you, they fall into two main categories. the land-use actions, the redevelopment amendment, planning zone amendments. all of these are essential in step one in order to achieve the project benefits, the parks, housing, and jobs. the other category of actions are related to process and implementing actions.
1:36 am
we can achieve this great public benefit programs through tax increments, so that is what the plan does -- establishes land use so we can use financing. there is a tax allocation agreement with the redevelopment agency said -- that says that is going toward infrastructure and affordable housing. these are about $2.4 billion with tax being about 1/4. another process in implementing actions are the land assembly items on your calendar. the two land assembly items on your calendar are the recreation and park land transfer agreement and the public trust agreement. the land transfer agreement, the site of the existing stadium is the site on candlestick that provides some 630 square feet
1:37 am
of regional and neighborhood retail as well as mixed use housing components, unless we transfer the land through the agreement, we cannot move forward. specifically, that land transfer of the associated stadium parking lot area was specifically authorized. the trust agreement is a bunch of strips that do not make rational sense for public access, and once we're done with the public trust in exchange, we will have an entire suite of public access bringing the entire area -- reading the entire area, and this will allow these areas to really be opened up to the city and the bay view as of vol. -- as all whole. another process -- the
1:38 am
cooperation agreement provides for orderly development over the next 20 plus years. similarly, we entered into an agreement with mission bay, and that is a process for the procedural review for the infrastructure. the code amendments are modeled on mission bay, and they are already on the books. there is a process for subdivision, a review of subdivision maps. we are extending that to the candlestick area so there is orderly development. in association with the clean-up action, there are amendments to article 31 of the building code and the related public works thrown -- code. the department of public health, and you created this special article 3 of the health code to
1:39 am
impose requirements of construction activities, and we're providing additional oversight. that is of to the process -- after the process to make sure there is appropriate oversight and the remaining amendments. before you can take these actions, there is the item you will adopt as the city attorney. that concludes the staff presentation. we are available for questions, redevelopment and other staff are all here. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. supervisor chu: thank you, and i want to things -- thank the
1:40 am
city staff and others. we are obviously at a crossroads. tomorrow we will be considering the secret documents and a feel for this shipyard project -- the ceqa document for the shipyard project. tomorrow we will all be weighing various materials from the planning department, from the project sponsor, and the testimony from everyone who provides testimony. i did not plan to pre-and judge what is going to happen soon mauro, and as our -- to happen tomorrow, and as our chairman said, they will be coming out of committee without recommendation. i think today does present an opportunity to make changes to the project to make it better.
1:41 am
frequently, for all of us who have been involved in large projects, supporters often dig in their heels and prepare for battle, but from my perspective, i think it is easy to lose sight of the fact that we can help shape projects to make them better. i think today is one of those opportunities, and i will propose a number of amendments to do just that. i have five amendments involved in many of the key projects we have today, and i would like to spend a few minutes describing the amendments that i would like our colleagues to include in part of the package. the amendments are going to focus first on cleanup, secondly, the bridge, third, the issue of health care access and in particular the expansion of
1:42 am
the southeast health center. fourth, i want to touch on workforce development, and last topic is the topic of public power. first, as stated earlier, the federal government has not made any final decisions on this personal, and we do have protection the prohibits from transferring the property until it has been radiated to protect human health and the environment. secondly, there is an agreement and regulates the cleanup of the shipyard, and that should provide a process for public implementation. in addition, our city's department of public health has a role in analyzing a cleanup. we continue to your significant concerns. while there has been a lot of
1:43 am
work and scientific study on the cleanup so far, i know my colleagues continued to hear from environmental communities about their real concerns, and because of this, i think it is important we take an active role in insuring federal requirements are carried out and that the public has a way to voice their concerns. i want to read the language i am going to propose we avenue to the first item on the calendar, and here are -- to propose we add to the first item on the calendar, and here they are. i would ask that it been concerned, and first, it declares the adoption of finding shall not in any way imply a cap. secondly, pursuant to the
1:44 am
proposition adopted by the voters, the board of supervisors hereby declares our intent that they shall approve the highest practical level of cleanup and that the agency shall not except such property until and unless the cleanup is satisfied. thirdly, the board of supervisors shall adopt a hearing before a final remedy is selected and urges them to participate in such hearings. that is my suggestion puree good -- that is my suggestion.
1:45 am
i would like to get some feedback. first, i want to thank many of our leaders who have raised concern. particularly, the proposed bridge. they have continued to see this as a necessary item. i certainly hope the forty- niners stay as part of the san francisco community, as i discussed with others, but given the june election, i think there's a real uncertainty there is uncertainty. now, i greatly appreciate the concept. this is only accessible to pedestrians, bicyclists, and
1:46 am
clean public transit. also, the non stadium alternative. given the concerns raised by environmentalists, i would like to present something related to the larger bridge, if the 49 years state. my amendment would propose that if the 49ers' want to build a larger bridge, they have to come back to the board of supervisors. the intent of this is to ensure that any bridges complementary to the habitat, recreational, and public access needs. this oversight will mean that access is consistent with various restrictions and design standards to help insure the protection of our habitats and to make sure that the bridge to release serves as an open space amenity. the certification -- third set of amendments i have have to do with health care, and it deals
1:47 am
with a critical piece of infrastructure that i think is lacking in the current plan, and that is access to health care for low-income communities. huge inequities have been identified, regarding health insurance, regarding access to regular health care, access to preventive care, and we all know that in lower income and minority communities, there are high rates of morbidity, hospitalization, and mortality. there are some that say that the shipyard in its current state is not a threat to state -- residents. this is a plan for the future so everyone can thrive and be healthy, and i agree can only do this with adequate facilities. -- i think we can only do this with adequate facilities. in 2003, there was some work
1:48 am
done in this area but never completed. i have had meetings recently, and we all agree that the southeast help center needs to be expanded. we need a study about how to do that, and with the department of public health and development, we need to pool the resources together to move this forward, so i will introduce an amendment that requires a contribution of another quarter of $1 million for expanding the southeast of center and to help pay for pre- development costs. but to expand in the southeast help center. -- for expanding the southeast help center. -- health center.
1:49 am
secondly, some portion of the woman's contribution, and thirdly, a portion that would be saved with the department of public health moves from the leased space that they currently have into their own space and expand its southeast health center in the future. -- from the leased space that they currently have into their own spaces in the expanded southeast health center in the future. i want to say that i appreciate work force development, but i am hoping that more can be done by this project. i know my colleagues, ross mirkarimi and sophie maxwell, have worked on this, and i want
1:50 am
to support them and others in strengthening the community benefits. curley, developers will contribute up to $9 million to the work force development -- currently. i understand there are others that ought to have a chance to take part in this program. it is unlikely that district and will be able to provide all of the jobs that we need, and so, my amendment would create a first preference for district residents but then korea a secondary preference for san francisco residents who are defined as at-risk job applicants under the ministry of code. this includes someone who is an economically disadvantaged person, including criminal
1:51 am
histories, substance abuse history, or other. it is my hope that we can expand the number of people in san francisco who can benefit. the last set of amendments that i have have to do with the topic of power. one aspect of this project that has not received much attention is that it does move this project. the 700 acre parcel allows for the creation of integrated public power and energy efficiency systems for energy, for water, and for solid waste management korea koran cheating korean development in sustainability region for water, and for solid waste management for creating development in sustainability -- for water and
1:52 am
for solid-waste management for creating development sustainably. this is a quick summary of the amendments that i would like us to consider after public comments, and, colleagues, again, i appreciate all of the work you are doing. all of us have likely conducted more meetings on this topic than anything else, which i have done since i have been on the board, and again, thank you for the efforts. bupresident maxwell: madam cler, could you please add my name to that? we will now open it up to public comment. they will probably just get right in line. espinosa with jackson, it is very appropriate that you are number wind.
1:53 am
-- one. i will read off a number of names. [reading names] thank you. >> thank you very much. espinola jackson, it gave you- hunter's point. -- bayview-hunter's point. the redevelopment agency should have this information because it was done years ago. i attended every meeting dealing with the bridge. not at one time did anyone of us say we wanted to have a bridge in back of us.
1:54 am
my question was, what would make you think that we would like to have a bridge in back of us? i took these off of the email. and i contacted mike snyder. he said he was going to be here, from city planning. when i opened it up, the first thing i saw, at no. 9, but and you have that, is whereas in 1997, that is false information, and i wanted to know, and i went through all of these papers. eckhard on page one, two, three, four to four, 5, 6 -- on page one.
1:55 am
i then went to where his name is. he said he would be year. cutting and pasting it. -- he said he would be here. present maxwell: next speaker, please -- president maxwell: >> the important opportunities in district 10 -- the employment opportunities. the second level of priority should be within san francisco. traditionally, the federal
1:56 am
government, even the county government, city government -- if you're civil service was a.d.d., you would become 85. -- was 80. so i urge that you will ask, recognizing a preference. president maxwell: very good point. thank you. next speaker, please. >> supervisors, on this project,
1:57 am
housing compaq -- housing, it will also increase a lot of jobs, so i am very supportive. thank you. president maxwell: next speaker, come on up. >> my name is -- i got laid up in 2007's. -- in 2007. thank you. president maxwell: thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is david, and i am here as a union member. the union members that we
1:58 am
represent are in favor of this project. as an organization, we work closely with local cbo's, trying to get education so they can carry a their jobs -- carry out their jobs. thank you. president not " -- president maxwell: ok, i will call more names. [reading names] >> good afternoon, madam chair, supervisor chiu, supervisor mar. supervisor mar mentioned a very
1:59 am
critical part of the plan, which revolves around transportation. we have concentrated on transportation improvements to route bayview-hunters point. -- improvements to bayview- hunter's point. it will have to be diverted. with the development of the shipyard. we have been working with the bay area transportation authority. in fact, the last meeting we had with them was july 7.