tv BOS Budget and Finance Committee 3917 SFGTV March 10, 2017 5:00am-9:01am PST
a way to mitigate for that and to act i'm okay with the shorter timeline as long as. >> when i talk 3 months didn't need to be done but 3 months we come in front of us and look at the work and, yes they got the plans and everything and the city says wait a minute i get it it shows up that they know how serious we are and their moving forward and condition it so if it were done sooner than it it if they get it done in a month we can lift the conditions once you're satisfied. >> so the question one question of time we're talking about 3 or whatnot and the other question what are we are doing with the kickoff conditions we're adding there are a few
things we can possibly do they said they only operate on fridays and saturdays and limit either of those nights so it is only one of the nights and limit the number of weekends a month there able to do night life extend hours there is also the question i think commissioner thomas last meeting a separate ambient level or noise level between hours of 2 and 6 i know that director jane cain that to have to inspectors go out twice or two times a night to monitor that is tricking i didn't and in terms of you know all the patrons release why i wow, i
can't hear are we capital improvement plan egging them. >> can i ask a question. >> how many of late nights are filled until 6 clock. >> cue come up to the mike. >> it is hard to tell a night by night situation depending on the talent so in dj they're staying all night long we will stay open later but this past friday 5 to 2:30 or another time it depends on the evening and how busy and whether or not the guests have staying to dance. >> what happens in the extended hours stopped at 4 even if a dj wanted to play with your promoting your event from 9 to 4. >> that's like other permit in
san francisco. >> i'm not saying in the intern to get yourselves together i mean can you survive on someplace. >> i mean that's at the painful question it really is it is very painful and especially, when i you know feel as if i feel this is i'm being unfairly treated i feel at one 10 we're operating with the levels i actually building at the one 13 we're operating legal limits a what a what we agreed on it is a birth pill to swallow. >> say for example leave it and you get another citations and what. >> that's a good question i thought about the implementations of mrpgz of
logging my after hours permit. >> not drag it out. >> it is something you have to understand those things take money and $2 million into this business as a single investor i don't know what that will cost me given a timeline i have to go back to the investor or find newspaper investors to the building i've improved. >> i kibitzing it is before your building an expensive car or getting a honda it is up to you, you. >> inherited what you inherited or inherited the building you inherited and had a dream a dream with a better sound system and we want to support that but in this industry we help to regulate we can't have bad actors that are keeping the neighbors up at
night it didn't look good inform you and our counterparts on the block and didn't look good in san francisco and the police that would rather have no night life night life in how can we close this and so i hear you it takes more money i think we want to the permit it not trying to behalf badly but need improvement that's why i'm trying to punch it back to you if you tell me how long to talk to that investor and get the numbers right that gives us more to work with from what i understand we have not had a clear road map how you'll make the improvement we'll have promises some have been met and others no. >> i've made all the initial
promises to the commission to make. >> i have. >> but the conjecture exchange was not good enough. >> it was not and i'll not saying i'll represent a map that i think we can keep you're asking me to do something i've not spoken to the contractor or looking what needs to be done to the building i need time i'll gladly e-mail you and work on thursday and first and by the end of the, week this is research i've done and the timeline we've been working with is that acceptable or you 79 me to come in two weeks with at road map go i want at what point when i'm operating within the
property line will it be okay to say to the neighbors within the city code can i do that between 2 and 6:00 a.m. if i'm going to invest. >> as long as you don't go over 8 atv over ambiance. >> no issues no citations. >> that's incorrect the citations are sound levels have changed a moving target one and back and forth it is confusing for us and to the two excuse me - violations were issued were different sound levels that changed and shaurp has been helpful to establish what is the sounds like level and i want to pause you to let shawn respond f
to the citations. >> it is important i hostility the entries on the enforcement timeline. >> on february 15th myself the operator and the sounded engineer and others were meeting all 4 of us established the level of one and 10 d b c for the center of the dance floor within the legal limit of 8 decimals ambiance i walked out that wednesday morning evening with a clear understand those hired by the operator we all agreed that one 10 on the dance floor equals within code on the revolver less than two weeks later i took
a measurement of one 14 and a half from the center of the dance author four and a half decimals louder than expressed so you're going over the limit set. >> right and that's what i'm saying our initial finding was one 15 and not a clear. >> i'd like to go bans your expert one 10. >> yes. >> and if it goes over over one 10 a ticket. >> agreed. >> agreed. >> so do many say as quickly as possible i'm appreciate you're saying get a road map by the end of the week. >> no let's give her a month. >> no, no, no we don't want to give her a month. >> in all fairness to give you time and the staff time to review it we're meeting in two
weeks i don't think we have to have a full blown hearing in two weeks but within a week helpful to have the road of what we're dealing with that gives us time to review that and decide how we may want to condition that at this point and if it takes me 4 months or 5 or of months or a year i'll probably see a different set of conditions than in the permit once the improvement have been made is that contrary clear. >> commissioners i'm offering to come back to the commission how much time that will take you see some head nodes. >> it is good giving her
thirty days. >> we're giving them a week for a road map a week to find a contractor we need a draft of what it will take to make either of the options that sulter or offer another one that is more cost effective great. >> that's what i'm saying. >> all right. >> did that mean status quo. >> didn't mean status quo i don't know how you feel about that you can offer a motion to do something in the status quo if you're trying to halt everything in the status quo i want to refer to section 106.20 point one of the code we say specific things that we have to highlight to defend in the case
that the venue did appeal our decision so i don't think we met that burden right now but so i don't know if we no way we can't suspected my interpretation but not sure what other things you're trying to suggest. >> you're saying just to be clear between now and a week or shows. >> next meeting. >> give us a road map at which point what to do between that point and when the status quo didn't maintain throughout that period just between now and the next meeting. >> yeah. thank you for clarification. >> sorry when you talk about the road map are you looking for a timeline she thought she has to go out to bid those two weeks i'll accept it and look at it
for two days and contract. >> the more specific the better i think that timeline helps us but helps the neighbors sort of anticipate you know what to expect what they'll have relief. >> do we have any pressure we can put on building permitted to help them get their permits done something to reach out to when they go for the permits that they kickoff get on the front of lion. >> not necessarily so many things in the pipeline i don't know if we could but perhaps director has some pull i'm not sure. >> this kind of seems like is important whatever they decide to do to get the permit as
quickly as possible. >> some 0 many that is development in san francisco. >> there are 0 the groups and the bottom line of groups that what reach out a. >> it is a over-the-counter permit no steps with the contractor filed. >> - >> all right. so we'll get a road by that ma that by the next week so we have time to look at it i mean some intern conditions we can say limiting the hours of you know does is end at 4:00 a.m. intuitively indefinitely an end change the d b level between 4 and 6 in the intern. >> in my opinion if she runs one d b-1 and 10 d b shouldn't affect the neighbors
regardless but seems to be the problem get on the ground over the one and 10 d b only two weeks to get the rod map in my opinion let them do their thing but if they get off citation we'll be serious about we we'll do and can't say we're puck picking on you we've given you fair warning not having the inspector giving out ticket i mean in my opinion. >> i agree not that had the d b is one 10 the problem is over that so making sure it stays under that and potentially asking our pickers to do late night testing as well just to
make sure the problem. >>was not at the one 10 >> okay. the bottom line the inspectors reads one 14 you're getting a ticket the 1u8 terraces report and inspectors one 10. >> gina as ample motivation to keep it at one 10 between now and two weeks when we rekwoej i'll be shocked if during that period of time if it came up if it did as stephen said we'll have a different conversation in two weeks if it happens and not going to go nearly as well are it seems to me it is a line for this. >> my $0.02 and i'd like to take a motion someone want to move to table the action on this
until our next meeting and also pending receipt of the we're calling a road map but the timeline on the improvement so would someone like to make the motion. >> no. >> i'll make the motion. >> great, thank you you're first motion a there a second. >> second. >> there is a second take a vote. >> commissioner frost no commissioner lee commissioner be like man. >> commissioner thomas commissioner caminong commissioner perez no president tan. >> that item passes you have two more weeks and we'll hopefully resolve it then move on to item no. 7 commissioners questions or comments the last item commissioners, i also have removed permanently what the
last item future items comploin them not a belabor the point any questions or comments you would like to make tonight. >> welcome to the commissioner and looking forward to working with you and getting to know you better welcome to the family. >> yeah. i'd like to join in on that and looking for you expertise it was good to hear you and bring to along to help me i want to say again, i bought that up last meeting with the st. patrick's day a pleasure putting this together and a lot of fun expecting great weather and a festival should be fun and looking forward to seeing everyone out there.
>> great. >> wait one more and then thanks for joining us as i said before we're lacking a small businesses like the bars and the clubs an polk street there is a lot of them that don't have the poe so if you could spend hopefully the next 4 years. >> we're also is it 4 years your finishing out adu distresses term 3 years now we have a full commission we want to put on the calendar a retreat to sort of plan out our work so if i could ask our staff maybe crystal a land on a date and venue in the next two anyone wish to comment on item number o months that would be great
all right. any public comment on the condemns seeing none, public comment is closed. and i'll adjourn at the >> we think over 50 thousand permanent residents in san francisco eligible for citizenship by lack information and resources so really the project is not about citizenship but really academy our immigrant community. >> making sure they're a part of what we do in san francisco
the san francisco pathway to citizenship initiative a unique part of just between the city and then our 5 local foundations and community safe organizations and it really is an effort to get as many of the legal permanent residents in the san francisco since 2013 we started reaching the san francisco bay area residents and 10 thousand people into through 22 working groups and actually completed 5 thousand applications for citizenship our cause the real low income to moderate income resident in san francisco and the bayview sometimes the workshops are said attend by poem if san mateo and from sacking. >> we think over restraining
order thousand legal permanent residents in san francisco that are eligible for citizenship but totally lack information and they don't have trained professionals culturally appropriate with an audience you're working with one time of providing services with pro bono lawyers and trained professionals to find out whether your eligible the first station and go through a purview list of questions to see if they have met the 56 year residents arrangement or they're a u.s. citizenship they once they get through the screening they go to legal communication to see lawyers to check am i eligible to be a citizen we send them to
station 3 that's when they sit down with experienced advertising to fill out the 4 hundred naturalization form and then to final review and at the end he helps them with the check out station and send them a packet to fill and wait a month to 6 weeks to be invited in for an oral examine and if they pass two or three a months maximum get sworn in and become a citizen every single working groups we have a learning how to vote i mean there are tons of community resources we go for citizenship prep classes and have agencies it stays on site and this is filing out forms for people that
are eligible so not just about your 22 page form but other community services and benefits there's an economic and safety public benefit if we nationalize all people to be a citizen with the network no objection over $3 million in income for those but more importantly the city saves money $86 million by reducing the benefit costs. >> thank you. >> i've been here a loventh i already feel like an american
citizen not felt it motorbike that needs to happen for good. >> one day - i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, for liberty and justice for all. >> you're welcome. >> (singing). >> (clapping.) >> introduce the san francisco field officer director ribbon that will mirror the oath raise your hand and repeat the oath i hereby declare on oath
repeating. >> citizens cry when they become citizenship to study this difficult examine and after two trials they come back i'm an american now we're proud of that purpose of evasion so help me god please help me welcome seven hundred and 50 americans. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> she wants to be part of the country and vote so much puppy. >> you know excited and as i said it is a long process i think that needs to be finally
recognized to be integrated that is basically, the type of that i see myself being part of. >> out of everybody on tv and the news he felt that is necessary to be part of community in that way i can do so many things but my voice wouldn't count as it counts now. >> it's everybody i hoped for a bunch of opportunities demographics and as you can see yourself there's a good life for everyone. >> that's why.
illuminating our ideas and values starting in 2016 the san francisco public utilities commission is xhoefl that light with new led with the did i audits for better light for streets and pedestrian and they're even better for this vitally lasting longer and consuming up to 50 percent less energy upgrading takes thirty minutes remove the old street light and repeat 18 thousand 5 hundred times while our street lights will be improving the clean energy will remain the same every san francisco street light is powder by 100 percent godfathers hetch hetchy power in one simple word serious as day turns i was chair.
so i would not have to do it again. >> good morning, today march 9th, 2017 i will call the regular meeting of the transbay joint powers. >> i will note for the record that director will not be present, harper, here. >> kim. >> present. >> sartipi. >> present, and chair. >> present. >> and you do have a quorum. >> okay. >> next its em. >> three is communications i am not aware of one. >> i do have one, excuse me if it is disjointed, i wrote it up over breakfast. the board will be going into closed session today, to discuss the prices and terms of what is incorrectly described as a
master lease of the terminal. actually we will be going into a line by line of a 25 page powerpoint presentation, most of which is historical recap. and none of which in my opinion consists of prices or terms of payment. but estimates of cost and revenues. that is already been discussed with the contractor. for many months staff rational for closed session is that we are talking to two parties and we are really protecting their confidenceal information. from each other, but from the first of this year, that rational has not been the case. rule purposes of this continue see guess trags is to leave as little time as possible for actual board member input of the important aspects of this long term contract to keep from the
public, the sorry economics we are in and to allow, and to allow the public to first see the contract only after it has already been in effect signed, sealed and delivered. i am sorry for this, because that is not just a loss to the public, but it is the loss of this board. because it is being denied the negotiating power that comes with public discussion. thank you. >> okay. thank you director harper. >> item four is board of director's new and old business. >> seeing none, item five is executive director's report. >> good morning, directors. as you recall, from previous updates, the new members of the san francisco county transportation commission asked for permission on the prop k
allegation request was considered at the january fourth meeting, since then we have worked with the staff to provide the briefings for each of the four new commissioners it was continued to the february, 28leth meeting given the recent delay of the federal funds for the cal train, the chair has indicated that he would like the prop k, allocation to be considered on the march first, meeting along with the up date on cal train electric identification. in addition, as a result of the input that we received from the staff we have revised our prop k allocation to exclude the engineering work for a portion of the work on faldon street, the revised request is a two part request. part one 30 percent engineering for the portion of the alignment that is xhon to all alternatives under consideration by the study which includes, work along the second street and after the train box extension of the train
box, and the bart connector. part two is the allocation request, studying in detail the cover section of the work on town send street, with the goal of the links of that section will minimize the input due in construction. we are eager to connect for the dtx and we will continue to work with the staff to resolve this delay as quickly as possible. we continue to work with the sf planning department and the director and his team to best rbi study to the successful completing, and this is our understanding that the current phases will be done in the next four to six months, at which time the costs and schedules for the various alternatives under consideration will be known and integrated schedule, that includes the dpx will be developed. moving forward, we are intend to be more involved in the developments and reb study and then deliver the health and
expertise that we have available for the team so that the study can be completed successfully as soon as possible. completing of the study is the significant step of advancing the high speed rail to a transit center. as a result of input from the public and board members, today we have an up date on the status of the supply mental document for phase two that includes an over all view of the comments and responses we have provided. region 9 has completed the review of the document and we continue to work with the sf planning to explain how we address the concerns, we hope to bring the supply mental documents for the board's consideration shortly. >> international and electrical worker ibew came after the construction site on february 21, 22, for the work on the project. and scott from our staff was interviewed to discuss the project's progress, in many ways, the ide and he has
contributed to phase one, and especially during the past year as mechanical and electrical and plumbing work has been in full swing, over the past year, we have actually placed 50 miles of electrical conduit in the center, it will be shown to the members and used in their public out reach effort. on february, 28th, the senior project construction manager, on and an event, sponsored by the golden gate association. and the lgbt chamber of commerce, milestone in regard of inclusion of lgbt business on the public works project. they have recognized sandra, the ceo and part owner of electric to have gotten the largest construction to an lgbt owned business anywhere in the united states when they were selected to provide the electrical materials and the supplies for the transit center project, and
the subcontractor. it was a golden gate, business association that other public agencies outside of the area will follow in our footsteps, and take note and realize that inclusion of lgbt contractors is good business. last but not least, our effort for recruitment for the internment ship for the summer has been began. it has actually been a year believe it or not. >> each year they hire, local rising high school students who are available to work for 6-week period to participate in the summer internship program. internships will run from june, 19, to july, 28th, these are internships that provide valuable work experience for students beginning in to form their future career's interest. >> we encourage the students, interested in exploring careers in engineering, finance, public service, and computer out reach. prior work and experience is not
required, about you engineering is welcomed. just kidding. >> resumes and cover letters should be submitted by april, 14th, and details can be found on the website, currently and we hope to bring the internship like we do every year to the board. we that, that concludes my report and there was a quarterly report that was submit inned your packet. if you have any questions, we can answer that. >> not a question just a comment. to the earlier part of your presentation. i think that it's good to hear of the interest to be more actively engaged in the rib study that the city is doing, but i will repeat what i said last year. i think that at some point, sooner rather than later we need to bring the efforts together because we have two different entities planning the same project, which at some point will not make sense, so it sounds like we are going to be hitting a mild stone like you said in 4 to 6 months in the current phase of the reb work is
done and i would encourage and work with the planning department and the city to actually bring these efforts together and i think that it makes sense to bring them in to tgpa so that we have a single process going forward. >> any others? >> okay. okay, next item. >> item 6, construction up date. >> good morning, directors, we will give this month's construction up date myself and ron, we will go through the regular or a list of agendas and i want to start off that we are at our peak construction and we are clipping along at a million a day, and we will be at that pace for quite a few months now as we are sprinting to december and we are on schedule at this point and i will continue to progress in the up date you as we go. but it is a very busy and that is why at this shows a lot of work on many levels. we do have a closer to the 800
workers now, on site. and working at all levels and one of the items ta note on this is the bus jet fountain now. it has been installed quite a bit in the last couple of months and there is good pictures to that effect. lower level is starting to wind down because a lot of the walls have been just about are done and then the electrical and the mechanical is filling them in. on the western zone, the pictures now of progress, more relate to elevators escalators and drywall and those kind of components are going in, in a feverish pace throughout the western zone, along with the switch gear and various elements related to building out the rooms. central zone, there is, you can see in the upper right-hand picture and you can see that some of this pretest elements of the bus jet fountain, and with the palm trees it was actually very neat this morning, when i was coming into work, and i actually enjoy the fact that as
you walk down first street and every driver on first street will see the palm trees up on the park. so it was a beautiful at the sunrise to see this, palm tree up there now, and so everyone will know what is going on up top. but also, the progress is going within as well, at the lower right, it shows a lot of framing that is going on, that is one of the skylights on, and at the bus deck level, getting framed out. and also, the temporary bridge removal was reopened and cat tracked last night, to insure that the striping was taken care of and it will be very shortly. and another picture of the grand hall and you will see a lot of framing going on and the most important element that is the north and the south side the of grand hall is that we have ceiling panels being installed and so it is really starting to take shape in the grand hall. and in the eastern zone, we have item such as the cafe, the drum
cafe because it is the round element to it, and the walls report for that and in the bottom left, a lot of awning is being installed now in the eastern zone as well. so the things are progressing well throughout. and at the bus ramp project, i do note here that starting a very shortly, next month, we will be including the bus storage facility construction up date. but we are just, we have the bus ramp here, a lot of the work at the far south end of the crash bayriers and grading and the false creek removals are all happening. frame five that is the drop in span, that was the metal element that is the connectivity between the cable state bridge and the transit center and, it did take longer than they anticipated. and they do have it done right. it did have to be installed and took a few weeks longer, that is reflective in the schedule that ron is going to present here shortly. it does not impact anything with the transit center at all. and it has float, months and months of floats, so there is no
connection between the tube, well there is just a note in that contract itself. and then the bottom right shows one of the guard shacks that is going to be up there now, as a lot of the security elements are put in place since we have moved passed the concrete and the steel element of the bus ramp bridge. one item note too, the temporary bridge removal at beel street was progressing. beel street was closed down on saturday morning and as soon as it was closed the overhead system, the lines were taken down. by monday, gordon ball had moved in and just about have done an amazing job the last three days, they are ahead of schedule, slightly, and we are keeping informed with everybody, but it is going well on beel street as the traffic is managed around and as with he go and as we are on track for our april first reopening to beel street. we did have one recordable incident since the last time that i was here, and it was not in february, about you it was on march first, i brought that in
there, usually i only keep the february month, but i did figure that it was close enough prior to preparing this, that there was one of the iron workers was drilling a hole through one of those metal sheet metals and his pinky got caught, in there. and unfortunately they had to do the work on his pinky and he lost a fair amount of his pinky in the process, about you in true, iron worker, he was back to work the very next day. so, on modified duty at least. and we enkured almost, 100,000 hours of trade and with the total of almost 3.16 million hours, to date. so with that, i will turn that over to ron, to complete the rest of the construction up date. thank you. >> good morning, directors and thank you, dennis and it is always and i enjoyed the photo as a testament of great progress in the last months or year.
in terms of budget, we are pretty much staying course with the expectations they are estimated to cost have completing remains constant at 2.146. billion. well, below our target max of 1.159. we had an uptick of expenditures reflective of the million dollar a day, stat that dennis had mentioned. in pace with the completing objectivity or the contract requirement for december 22nd. commitments that were elevated of 106 million that is reflected with the confusion of the new funding from the city as well as tifia and afforded us the
opportunity to notice to proceed to the contractors to give them a free and clear and wide path to meet their objective of substantial completion. with respect to costs, draw downs, last month, with he drew down about 3.8. almost half of that was really just procurement of the emergency radio systems. so that is all planned activity. other than that, it was some with regard to change orders related to work to accommodate the seismic join for the sales force tower that is a reimbursable as well. and the remainder are fairly incidental change orders.
schedule is pretty much constant which is a good thing in terms of the transit center. in terms of substantial completion and we held duration on final completion as well over the last month. the park given the amount of rain we had i was not surprised to see a couple of days slip on the roof park. again, we are striving to get better and good momentum on that to start reigning that in. and dennis mentioned the frame five difficulties for the bus ramp and that is reflected in the schedule as well in terms of showing a substantial completion of april 28th, which is a little bit late per their contract. however, it really has no impact on the transit center opening as you can see there is a lot of
space or float as we call it between substantial for the transit center and the bus ramp. but storage facility we did receive bids that is up coming agenda item that dennis will go into depth on. where we are eager to engage that effort that represented the largest budget risk in terms of unprocured scope. so the bid came in relatively favorable and i will not steal dennis's thunder, but we are comfortable with advancing that one. risk is constant in concerns of concern of maintaining schedule. again as i mentioned last month, the strategy is don't let the little things grow into big
things and we are trying to address issues as they are arising, and really a lot of small ball things that come up, are hearing about, you know, features of lighting and ceilings, and pile on. and nothing that rises us to the level of board concern. the temporary bridge removal was again, resequencing the strategy, and i mentioned last month that was engaged on saturday. and i believe that it is pacing a little ahead of schedule, which is a good thing. so i think that our general schedule mitigation strategy is bearing good fruit. added the risk of systems installation and commissioning, where we are engaging or initiating that effort. i will describe it as a
premitigation strategy. there is nothing over arching as a problem. but with all complex projects, low voltage and the like, always come in and bite you at the end. so, trying to stay ahead of that curve, and stay engaged or in formed of what chatter is out there as we advance shot drawings, and in particular, with fire alarms and with the fire department. they get rather persnikidy about the performance of the fire alarms and so i am just trying to make sure that everything is engaged and addressed in a timely fashion. some specifics are as i mentioned the roof part pile ones and some inner relationship with the fire alarm as it relates to the mass notification system which will be bringing to you soon. that is probably the largest last procurement we have.
we did receive proposals discussions and scope have not gotten to a point that i am comfortable of recommending advancing, so when we do get there, they will probably be the next last. and the hardware is always an interesting discussion of how they interact with the electrical and low voltage. and lastly, as always, the operational readiness is pretty much static last month in terms of focusing on we need to get a master acid manager on board. this board member but we are not quite there. and also, on board the security staff and facility and park staffing. and that is, advance and there
are interviews, and moving forward on that front. in terms of our transition meetings, and the forecast for full transit operations remain at march per ac transit in muni. and we have developed requested last month, you know, a look at and we have been developing schedules in transition plans. i was not quite comfortable enough to kind of delean ate the outline until we get the input from the facility manager, the security officer, and the acid manager. and so, that should be forth coming. and in the absence of those stake holders we are continuing to have our monthly transition meetings. rec nicing, you know, right now, that muni and ac transit are
trending towards march, and also recognizing that the january, and february is our kind of, if you will, area where we could absorb any slippage or one of our catch and early stand up of? incremental operations. we will be diving deeper in that with the stake holders at the table. for the last of the stake holders on the table, the one adjustment that i would have made on the monthly meetings, to put a little different structure to it as we have pretty much got each monday, we meet on transition, with the stake holders that we have available. and each monday will be a rotation of focus first monday of the month is communications and second is trying to button up the mlu and contracts. the third monday is a focus on technology. and systems and then the fourth
monday will bring the primary champions of operational staff and procedural planning. and so i think that we have the structure in place and we have a good measure of the stake holders at the table, but i am eager to round out that table to allow us to perfect the standing up of the facility. >> and with that, that concludes my portion of the report. >> any questions from the directors. the operator readiness, and right now muni is schedule to ac transit, and because a lot of people a lot of riders transfer between the two systems. that is why, we are out at march as well. muni readiness could be sooner, and so just know that that flexibility is there if there is a need or a desire for full or
partial change sooner, we can be flexible on that. >> and yeah, and, they have expressed that as well. and i appreciate that input and again, once we get fullny engaged and fully rounded it he table. wither going to try to get it going as soon as we can. overlaid with all of the other system readiness stuff and the facility and what have you. >> but, right now, the trajectory, you know, really looks like march for full. but there is a lot of incremental or elements that could start manifesting themselves in the january, february, time frame. i believe. >> and we will try to maximize that. >> could you? >> thank you. >> thank you, and it is a great report from your team and i just want to follow up a little bit about the operational readiness slides that you put together in a given director har per's comments earlier this meeting.
there is a cost to the organization, the longer the master lease e does not come on board or the longer that it takes to start to have buses, revenue service in the facilities. so i think that we are not able to give you a guarantee right now. and or when the revenue service will begin or when the master lease e will be ready. so between you and our executive director, i think that you need to start bracketing what that monthly cost is going to be just in case. because we cannot finish construction and leave the facility no one there. >> right. >> there is a maintenance cost and a security cost, no matter what, as soon as the contractor steps away, and says here are the keys, we have a responsibility to maintain and keep this facility secure, regardless of the master lease,
and there is going to be a monthly cost and a revenue for that. kwha that mielt be so they can start thinking on the other side of the ledger where it will be. if we have to make arrangements for security there is a cost for. >> yes. >> so given where we are in the calendar and where you have been working hard with your team to complete construction we need to be ready for that. >> yeah and mark and i are working close and i understand although, i am not part of all of the elements of that. and i believe that is kind of baked into the development of the operating costs. that has become in the mix or because of the projections. but you are right, there are repercussions of coming later rather than sooner. i mean, you know, even that, you talk about handing over keys, i had a discussion yesterday over what is the key-in schedule for
the building? we don't have the person at the table to round that out, and i have done a lot of keying for buildings and that gets rather detailed and time consuming sometimes. but again, i'm used to hospitals with 3,000 doors. we have 500 here. so, it is not quite as heavy lifting. but, those are the kinds of things that come up and need to be addressed on a day-to-day basis. and we are with or without the player at the table. and i'm fully comfortable with making decisions based on the information that we have and the experience we have in the room. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> any other questions? >> okay. >> so i think similar to both director gee and reiskin that tightness and making sure that we as we finish things and you know, who is coming when, and when the certain activities would happen in any cost or
anything. and that should be worked out so that we can feel comfortable that we are moving towards december, and absolutely. >> and that is at the forefront. >> thank you for the up date. >> thank you. >> okay. on 7, is the citizen's advisory committee up date. and we have bruce with us. >> good morning, chairs nuru and directors. my name is bruce and i am the chair of the tgpa citizen's advisory committee, my comments will be focused in four areas this morning. and it is going to track a bit along with executive director's comments earlier. first as mark indicated going before the commission on march 14th is a proposal for the 5.4 million dollars of prop k funds
to appreciate two items. 4.5 million for the 30 percent design, and the portion of the dtx, including second street and the extension of the train box and the pedestrian walkway from the transbay, transit center to the station, and the 900,000 dollars to study the portion of the current or pennsylvania alignment to determine if either some of the boring or miepd r mining can be used to minimize the cut and cover. and i think that it is critical, you know, minimizing the cut and cover, and the associated disruption along the street at the fourth and king station as well as throughout the neighborhood is critical. based on current activity and we talked about this before, in the neighborhood along with increased volumes associated with the central soma plan, and cut and cover, construction, would bring it, would bring the neighborhood to a stand still. i am in full support of the 5
hpt 4 million ex-pepped tur at this time as these appear to be no regret $extend surs that were covered under the 4.5 million will be used in any of the three alignments considered as part of the rab study, in the review of the street as necessary as part of the rab study to help to identify the costs. of these alignments using the townsend corridor. >> they were pleased and encouraged to hear at this week's cac meeting that the recommendation could be made on the preferred alignment on the next 4 to 6 months and that is what we are talking about over the past year or so and we were really pleased to hear that. the approval to move forward with the work associated with the 5 hpt 4 million, request for the 30 percent design along with the recommendation on a preferred alignment keeps the mow men tom moving forward on phase two of the project. >> and i do want to, you know,
from a realistic, realistic perspective make sure that i share with you and i know we are all concerned with the uncertainty created by washington, with the delay of the 647 million dollars of federal funding, identified for cal train electric identification, based on this, we all some might say or we might say, what is a sense of urge intelligency, to authorize this funding and should we wait until the current funding is resolved, but i know that i am preaching to the choir here and as a region and as a state, our economic engine and jobs and quality of life are dependent on robust transportation infrastructure, california, population and jobs will continue to grow and we need to find a way to get this built, without it we will experience grid lock. and i have confidence that agencies responsible for bay area transpowrtation funding we will find a way to get it done, in the meantime, getting the
planning and the study work completed in a timely manner is critical, so that we can get the extension built and bring the rail into the ttc minimizing delays. >> second, i would like to move on to phase one of the project. and that is's cac is very pleased with the construction progress made to this point, in the sense of urgency with the project team to transition bus operations as quickly as possible after the december opening. however, as ron just indicated, and we still see that is targeted for march 2018, we are hopeful for an earlier phased in approach to start as early as possible after the first of the year. with that said, kind of shifting gears, we are deeply concerned and director harper thank you, and chair nuru and directors, you know, we are all deeply
concerned with the delays of bringing on an asset manager. not only from a delayed standpoint just standing up services in retail, but also what we have been hearing recently in the media about the shortfall of funding to you know, for operations in maintenance, and so, you know, our, you know, our focus in support is to move this forward as, you know, with the right amount of due diligence as quickly as possible, and make the great decisions, to move this forward. so that as a center opens, we are prepared of how we are going to handle any deficits, stand up any services, and the associated retail with the bus, with the transit center opening. in addition one of the concerns of not having the asset manager on board, is that really the need to work with the department
of homelessness and supportive services to have an approach to address the homeless issue at the center with the adjacent communities and we know that that is a key item to the asset manager in the more time that they have to get ready we understand is a pretty long runway to be ready to address these issues. so we look forward to reviewing and providing feedback on plans, in both of these areas, and we are pleased with the commitment from the lincoln hills, cbd who has been actively engaging with the product team to work on these issues. like to shift again to, i think that you are going to hear, on the agenda is comments on the information on the supply mental eir, and eis, and i have already mentioned comments about some of the concerns along the counsel send corridor. but i would also like to express
the concerns from the eir, and regarding the 16th and 7th streets intersections. although, this they have been addressed with the mitigation strategies, there are significant impacts today and with the continued development in mission bay, and rock and dog patch and with the chase center, developments with in most parts supported by the city and community, the crossing or the depressed roadway, which the latter being part of the high speed rail plan, is truly unacceptable to the community. last, there will be another item regarding the tjpa ca appointments we hope that they will approve the recommendations that are being put forward by the project team. based on the working relationship over the past six years, two of the past members including myself are reappointments. this group of members have been
engaged on the discussion of the issues bro ut forward by the project team. and believe that we provided valuable feedback on behalf of the stake holder groups in presentations that come before the board. two members will not continue on the cac, based on a variety of reasons, vice chair post and member, alice rogers and on behalf of the members of the cac, we wanted to thank them both for the service and for the contributions will be missed. >> that wraps up my up date. >> thank you chl >> okay, great. >> thank you. >> thanks. >> all right, your next sit em is 8, public comment, it is an opportunity for the members of the public to address you for the members that are not on the calendar, rehave row land, followed by jim patrick. >> good morning directors.
so if you heard what i just compelled to share with you what i actually see in the cac. the first thing i said is that what -- the full board in on the fourth or the 23rd. i will personally insure that the supervisors do not allocate a single dime to this further engineering and the cir. i then spent two minutes outlining another alignment. that has got absolutely no impacts anywhere, any no surface impacts any way in soma north of townsend other than second street but that is between alemena and toma nothing else. and it is the full grade separation, cost of tending is a $400 million, and seen there to what you would do in the subway, and that is 1.7 miles. the same idea, no any way,
because we know, we know how the evacuation takes place and i think that the mta is going to help to move that conversation. but, with regards to not having the funding, i think that the message from them is clear. with he got to start being smarter with the way that we spend money on transportation, and that is exactly what we are going to do here. but the thing that i really wanted to address you on is to give you an up date on the platform heights. and i believe that it is in the september or the october, and the time frame, i mentioned that we already had issued an npr and the notice of preparation of anything. which basically defined what they called, the transit which is the high speed transit supposed to look like, which is the locomotive and the side and the passenger compartments in the middle and similar to the french and the architecture. what i want to close off is to read to you is the next track from a letter dated february the
7th from the peer review group which is one of the conditions of what happens when the high speed rail wants to submit the funding plan to the legislature. and with he have recommended in past letters that you are abducting the trains from the outset, because the platform will be consistent with the lower level used by cal train and the ace if they are joined in the future. >> in our discussions the authority indicated that they will come to the import from the new system. and we recommend that this issue be addressed carefully before the hsr, for the rolling stock free design and it might point you on the director gee, this was two sets of doors and these trains that cost more than anybody could ever think which by the way don't have the capacity that we need that has to be stopped immediately, with the waste of 20 million so far. thank you.
>> kim patrick. >> kim patrick, san francisco, and i ross not a favorable article for the tjpa. we have no one on the staff in terms of public relations who is really rebutting an article like that. the last piece of public information we put out was a pr on the infinity of leaning over and what have you. we need to be managing this process. i think that we need to get out of the engineering phase, we have got great engineers, we need to get into the management phase. we need to have business people saying hey, listen, we need to -- we have got a great product here and these are the features and benefit and we have a schedule and we are meeting the schedule and going this direction and what have you. we are missing that. and i think that we are making a t strategic mistake, because we need customers in the end game.
and we see what has happened with the oakland connection down there on bart. we don't need that problem. we want a full vibrant transit center and we have to work to that. not only do we have to build it, about you we have to work to see this achieved as well. and that takes marketing and takes public relations and it takes a long term effort to make it happen. with he need to be on that ball, thank you. >> okay, and then we have saline jones? good morning, directors. chairman, my name is doren jones i am a former ac transit bus driver of 21 years, and a candidate for the ac transit board of directors, i am here today to express my humble and my great gratitude of being on a transbay task force, and being able to on february, 24th, to go with the rest of the task force members inside the new transbay
terminal. you guys are doing a fantastic job. i was so impressed when seeing everything from the ground floor up to the garden. so with that being said, one of my campaign three key notes was trying to bring an hov lane on the bay bridge to keep the buss on time to the transbay terminal. if you guys are having meetings on that, i would like to be in those meetings. or if no one has thought of it, or started on it, i would like to help. and offer all of my advice. thank you. >> that concludes members of the public that wanted to address you under that item. you can go ahead and move into your consent calendar. >> yes. where all matters are considered to be routine, and acted upon by single vote, there will be no
separate discussion, unless a member of the board or public so request, we have not received any indication that any member of the public or board wish to have any items severed. >> the items. >> moved for approval. >> first and second. >> director gee. >> oi. >> reiskin. >> aye. >> harper >> aye. >> nuru. >> aye. >> the consent calendar is approved. move to your regular calendar. >> yes >> item ten, authorizing the executive director to execute a construction services contract with , as the responsible bidder submitting the lowest responsive bid in the amount of $21,608,720 with a contract time of 281 working days for the bus storage facility. >> directors, shawn will present this item. >> good morning directors. i present i am pleased to present to you the bus storage facility and award
recommendation. the facility is located now between second and third street and it is directly underneath the west approach project, an area that i am familiar with and i spend a lot of time in my career actually in that area. and so it is an interesting homecoming. but that is a facility that reconnects or allows for a connection between the bus ramp and to allow for the ac transit and other public transit buses to sit during the daytime to eliminate any dead heading that we would be required to go back to the east bay. the facility itself is the scope itself is the majority itself is the ramp itself over second street, and there are many retaining walls and the sound walls and it isn't, you know, a neighborhood area. the still man street and the perry both have residents in the area. i'm personally very familiar with many of them.
so it is important that we are good neighbors. and those elements have been built into the structure. it accommodates for about 50 buses, spaces in there. and it also has a facility for the ac transit bus drivers, and managers and such in a, in an administrative building, and on various things, but it does allow for to keep the buses off the streets. and that is the important thing to keep them off the second street, harrison street and any of the areas that can go straight from the transit center directly over to the bus storage facility. and the other items too, involved in the booth and just utility work associated with the administrative buildings and the guard shacks and security that goes into the facility. as part of that scope of work as well, there is anticipated hazardous material that we had as alternate in allowance in the bidding process. the bid summary, i want to start off one item that was not noted
in your staff reports that is different, the staff report noted a no protest we received. we did receive one protest in the time period from the second bidder and it was related to a suband it's sve utilization, and sense then, with he have added to the construction and the perform and give a response that response was adequate to us. and that denoted basically that the submay not have been in the performing the particular electrical work but he had a second tier subthat was also an sve, doing the work and so his sve numbers rolled up to exactly what he had proposed and in everything, and it is just, the form itself does not allow for a second tier subto be noted but under the listed subwe felt very comfortable in denying the protest. and that notification has gone out already. but then so the issue for the bid was january, 11th, and we
did receive bids march first, so that is the bid protest period ended yesterday, and the budget waz 20 million, 20,000, we estimated it was an aplus, b, contract and so we allowed for a range between, 280, and 345 days, with a goal of 18 percent. we did prequalify five bidders and we received three bids that were in the range between 21.6 million to 24.2 million dollars. two bidders did not bid, i talked with them personally, and they said that they did their work load and their resource levels would not have, and they would not have been able to meet the needs for this job, quite frankly some of the jobs have been stacked up because of the winter storms. and so that pushed out a lot of their project and so they did not have the resources and so the two of them did not bid and we did have three bids for our aplus, b, contract and i know that we have talked about the contract in the past. the a is basically their bid. base bid, the b is the bidding on the time that we assigned a
nominal amount, 2500 dollars just for comparison purposes only. and i will go through that in the next want. >> the next slide after this. >> and we do have and there is the listing of the five that we did receive for the pre-quals. >> and here is the results they feelsome themselves and the apparent bidder and they have what we have got here, on this the base bid and any of the alternate in the allowance and we accepted all of them. especially since it is related to the hazardous materials and allowances related to traffic control, basically using the police for the traffic in the area. so a lot of construction and had a 21.608, 720 million dollars low bid, compared to the others and it is a fairly tight spread and it was a good bid, 281
working days, as wells and so that gave to the bid purposes comparison only, the bottom number, but for award purposes it is the total bid amount for 21.6 million dollars. so as was noted it was an element of the protest which was denied, the sbe goal was 18 percent, and in july to construction submitted a robust, 32 percent. and so that was a very impressive listing. that goes through the numbers. the total award amount as i noted was 21 million, 608,000, 720 dollars, the budget was 20 million, 20,000 that was the difference. it leaves, 1.1 million, 588,000. to be funded through the program reserve. and? discussions and looking at the bids, the reason for the overage, the overwhelming over half of that is related to a seismic joint. in the original estimate, there
was a certain type of seismic joint through the process and after the design estimates that had to be an increased. we have, and you know, many of the bridge projects when you have to do an increase, those are not cheap elements. so that was that was the overwhelming majority and the rest of the dollars were spread out over the fact that this job just bid about a year half later than it was pushed for a while so the combination in the escalation in that joint it accounts for the 1.588, 720 dollars that are requested from the program reserve. 6 million reserve, and then the balance after this award and the balance will be 125,000. and i do note that in the previous item, the bus storage facility rent will also be
coming from the program reserve at 24,000. 160, during the construction, only. and then at that point, it does as per will eventually reflect in the sublease. and it will be transferred over to ac transit. so at this point, i request a recommend the authorization of the executive director to execute the construction service to the ghilotti construction. if there are any questions >> i don't know if it is an issue legally you but ac transit had some hazardous waste removed from one of the bus yards, some time some years ago. but we were listed as the generator of the has ard yus
waste on the manifest. and apparently in terms of the dtsc and other regulatory agencies, once you are listed as the generator, you are liable completely for making sure that waste not only for making sure that the waste was disposed of in a proper facility, but that was the proper facility. and we ended up being a long time involved in the cesterson litigation, because we were just simply listed on the manifest. and so since then, ac transit has shaped these contracts so that the person who is doing the hauling off makes sure that it is delivered for the proper facility and list themselves as the generator. i don't know if this is all still relevant, and i say that was years ago, but, you know, i would keep that litigation itself, costs us several hundred 1,000 dollars and i hate to see us volunteer fld in one if we could simply have the contractor
listed as the generator. >> well it is very clearly in the lease contract between cal transand the tjpa that it is the listed generator as part of the agreement, and the manifest will be signed by the guy right behind me ed. and so also, it is part of the contract, that the construction has to handle. >> that is too bad. >> and one thing that i do have to note actually is i did not notice that we have the inkroechment permit that we are in the middle of. i want to show this and the plan specs, and submit. and i say that because the teamworked really hard. to get to this point.
part of the application right now, and it is the partial encroachment and no one sees any issues with that at this point, and so i want to point that out before i forgot. >> any other questions? >> yes. >> you mentioned the b, value, being 2500 on that bid. what is the tro? >> i believe that it is 5,000. we kept it nominal because of the impacts for less than the tro. >> great. just a quick clarification that the 22.0 million dollar estimate
was that the original or is that the estimate about a year and a half ago when the project was supposed to go out to bid? >> yes, and it is also and that is what is in the budget. >> now the 2016, june budget. >> i mean one of no one on this day is, but i deal with a lot of other elected colleagues around the region who believe that time and money are not connected. so 5 percent is what we escalation has been going, and so if you do 5 percent per year and year and a half, that is out where the bid results came in and with the exception of the expansion joint. >> right. >> i have the folks believe that if i wait five years the construction costs will go down and i don't understand it at all. but thank you. >> i want to make sure that i heard that directly. >> yes, i'm the last point given that we were budgeting 20 and now we are authorizing 21, we
would still have the estimate of completion will have to include which is part of the program reserve. >> give that a shot. >> and the completion stays the same and we set aside 117 million dollars in program reserves. 100 million that we were not going to touch. 17 million to deal with unknowns and knowns. and that comes out of the 17 million dollars. just for the completion of 2.146 is the 100 million dollars, and the low bids or low rfps that we have seen in the next. and earlier this year. so we have set aside, 15 million for the issues and the other issues that we are see the risk there and we wanted to budget for. >> okay. >> great. >> and 2146 should not change. >> good, i just wanted to first acknowledge that i know that
this got delayed for a long time because of the lease issue. but from the time that got resolved to see a bid go out and fewer than 60 days later, we are here ready to authorize approval and the fact that we had three bidders, which we are finding in this climate, and it is almost rare that we even get three bidders, the fact that i guess, kind of luckily, we got such a high, sve participation rate and that the bid, you know, given the delay understandable came in as far as i am concerned, more or less on budget, and that is the thing that it is the great work of the teams that we have taken those previous recommendations about how to make sure that we are an attractive owner to work for, to get the good bids, and to get this up so quickly. this is a good job on that. >> okay. >> i do want to ask given that we are looking at a march third of operations and the schedule shows substantial at end of july, which i get is only what
is it 16 months from now? it was good to see that bid came in at the low end of the duration range, and i am wondering if we think their opportunities to shrink that march for july window so that the transit and the other operators can start getting beneficial use of this sooner after opening than we are currently projecting. >> okay. i will we will be engaging with the contractor shortly, in fact i would like to acknowledge nick and his team that are in the back row here, and we will be engaging in to engage that kind of a discussion to see what can happen. >> since they are here, maybe they can convince me. 12 months. >> go you want to commit to 12 months? >> i heard a yes. >> yes. >> get that on the record. >> but i do want to thank if i could, dennis for arranging the a, plus, b because it worked as
far as we were having and we could get the bids by having the contract and give us the number of bids verses our engineers predicting the number of bids. the neighbors on the still, and perry, and you know, we worked on the bay bridge approach and they are very, very vocal and so we make sure that the extensive out reach happens to them as this project moves. >> as was noted sooner, we need the public out reach definitely. thank you. noechlt no members of the public want to comment, is there a motion? >> approval? >> second. >> the first and a second. director harper chl >> aye. >> riesskin. oi. >> gee e >> aye. >> nuru. >> aye and item ten is approved. we will call your next is em. item eleven, authorizing the executive
director to execute an amendment to the professional services agreement with to accommodate increased program management/program controls services for an amount not to exceed $5,400,000. >> this is an item that kaz continued from last month, and we have dennis is going to present it. and we have provided some more explanati explanation. >> good morning, directors dennis, and we took your comments from last month and we have really did revamp this staff report to try to incorporate them and try to tell the story in a loo light that hopefully we will be able to show here with the different graphics so that will help to tell the story a little bit for the pmpc, i want to start with this one that is a graphic that shows the very top line, the blue line, we have broken this out and this is the four years
basically of the pmpc, from july of 2014, all the way through july of 2018. that is depicted here. and that blue line is what was originally submitted by urs. that is a number that was approximately 37 million dollars. and in a very simple graph that you can see that. the numbers that we are talking about now are much lower than that original budget and it is graphically here. but, in mid 2016, we at that point we are still burning at exactly where we are projecting. there was no changes athe that point. but we did see things down the horizon. all spending was done actually a little bit below the line, up until that point. but we did see what was coming for ward. so when we identified where we had the budget, and we saw that the projections, the estimate was lalths bit higher, that is
when we started raising, the item, and bid included in the june, 2016 budget with the 4.4, million dollars to address this very issue, to try to get ahead of it to get the word out as much as possible. and so that, and but then at the end of 2017 numbers is important because as a reminder that is what we projected pmpc the services will have gone out to, what we knew in july of 2014 was, we had an earlier substantial completing, and a lot of items were unknown passed that point and so we felt that it was important not to include those, and why fund them if we didn't think that they were necessary at the time. and obviously with today's element, we know that we want to and we are requesting to take out the pmp services out to mid, 2018, so there are two elements that are part of this request. one of them is the part of the line that is above that star. and then there the part that is the next star that takes you for
an extra six months. so that is various elements that are part of this request. and then it also shows you will spent verses forecast in there, and it is tracking and have been tracking well. there is another graphic that we put together to try to tell the story of how spending has been going and how it has been on track. you look at the very first task order, the very first year, 7.5 million was the original task order written and it came in for that year, 7.2 million, and so we did come under that first year. you go to the second year, the task order number 13 shgs for the next 12 months it was up a little, and it was an uptick a little bit compared to the task order but the over all spending for the consider itself was still under what we are projecting. now bringing us more in line where we at in talking in this current task order, we have only to date, through, i should say
through december of 2016, we would spend, 3.1 million, only at that point. and we at the task order and was projected at the time to be 5.3 million, but now with some of the items that we have identified that are essential, along with any kind of credits that we have been taking on any other line items we project a spend of over 6.9 million on this, of a particular task order. and then when you, when you go to the next task order, we have identified additionally, 2.1 million we originally thought it was and now the need for 2.8 million and i will go into some of these drivers on the next slide. and then the task order 15, is a completely add because that is that time fra i am from january of 2018, to july of 2018. for 2.1 million dollars. and then the last item, shows too, is the phase two next
steps. is also an unbudgeted, 1.3 million which is the prop k request that we are familiar with. so if you go he to the far right totals, it shows that the original approved amount was 21.8 million, and we have spent to date, 17.2 million. and we identified the charges plus the phase two that gets us to the requested ask of 27.2 million dollars for this item. the item, and there are, there are multiple drivers that are part of this request, the numbers here which was as of noted last time, don't add up to the you know atz this is the additional scope. items not the 6 months, 2.1 million dollars, this is what we have identified as the 1.5 million dollars, and added scope for phase one work.
that is the first item and the first 6 bullets are phase one, and the last bullet is phase two. and additional investigations items such in with the bus ramp and bus storage required additional what we found is and what we have to do is more than what was originally budgeted. services and the additional security elements. and had a lot to do with value engineering. that the value engineering as a whole helped the program, but there was when you redoing the value engineering and the plans and it had to utilize security and safety. and the experts to go back and revised view, in the shore and design the criteria were met and another item that really added to the security was the transfer of the ecs and the em, and that was the physical security information, and the emergency communications, and mass notification systems, that were originally going to be under the web corp contract but it was
better, we, it was moved under the pmp contract. and then the it, at 528,000 and o& m revenue, and the master leasee and for the start up, none of those items and those two bullets were accounted for the original, 21, because this was back in july of 2014, they were not accounted for. and in the last item, the last bullet on this sheet, i identified the 460,000, it is a phase two item. and it has everything, and it is related to advancing the environmental document itself which is actually part of agenda item 13 right now. so, i hope that explains and actually answers the questions that were brought forth at the last board meeting. if you have any questions i
could address them now. >> any questions from the directors? >> yes sfl >> this just comes off of director reiskin is talking about the grab and phase two, and so are we saying i gather from this that unless the prop k money comes through, there won't be phase two work? or are with he just saying we are going to spend on it, as we want, whether it is prop k pays for it or not? >> we note in the staff report that it would be available funding. whether it is prop k or other. it could be utilized for this, the phase two item. >> well we have a bank account that is availableable funding. >> let me verify, we don't get the prop k, unless weapon fund other money, we will not be able to move and we will not be able to proceed in the. >> for the 1.1, million. we do have the money available right now that we are using to
coordinate the study. we have little left. and that is justify the coordination of the study and the coordination of the cal tran and the high speed rail, and we budgeted in the regional 2014, budget, about 150,000 for that effort. because it took longer than we thought it would. and there is much more coordination and we needed a little bit more money for that. >> and that is what is reflected in one of the driver foz that. >> all right. >> first of all this presentation was very helpful and it might be helpful to get these presentations with unless it was there with the staff report, and i didn't maybe i didn't scroll down. i am ready to support this item. just one question, when you said there was a security technology scope that was moved from the web corp to the pmc, and that accounted for some of the
increase on the pmp was there an increase on the side. >> there was actually on the pre-con element and there was a decrease and we will realize that as an opportunity. >> all right. thank you. >> any other questions directors? >> move. nechl second. >> first and a second and no members of the public wanting to comment on the item. director harper? >> oi. >> reiskin oi. >> gee. >> aye. >> nuru. >> aye. item seven is approved. call the next item. approving the recommended applicants to the transbay joint powers authority . >> it is not coming up. >> yeah, scott? >> good morning, directors, i think that our cac chair, bruce did a good job of describing the out comes of our recruitment process and very quakely as a
reminder, we have 15 seats and, each seats is sdesignated for te stake holders with an request in the transit center, and so we ensure that we have broad representation of all of the points on the committee. the members serve for the two year terms and the terms ever staggered so that half of the seats are up for renewal. and we had 7 seats up for renewal and we had one member that resigned mid term and so we had eight seats available for appointment. members are eligible serve up to 3 consecutive two year terms and so as bruce indicated. we have six current members of the cac that are reapply and we are recommending the reappointment and then we have the two new members that we are recommending. the staff report gave the details on the recruitment process but i am happy to answer the questions that you have about the process or the recommendation. >> i have one question. if i was read tg right it looked like one of the new proposed members lives in pretty far east
and works in southern california. and --. >> he works in a regional office for a company that is based in southern california. >> right. is the regional office anywhere close to the transit center? >> well he, it is in alameda so he is, he is being appointed to the environmental seat and so he works for the solar energy company he is actually here today. >> it just seems like it is not closely connected to the project. >> he lives in the service area. >> okay. >> thank you. other yez? >> members of the public? >> public comment? >> yeah. >> thank you, and very briefly, so, as you mentioned earlier, as in the request of the consideration, i think that you need to consider at one point
collapsing those and the tjpac, as you move to a phase two. and i would respectfully put it to you, there is much more relevant institutional knowledge, within the c, than the current tjpac as far as phase two is concerned. >> all right. thank you. >> first and second? >> on the citizen advisory. >> i would move approval of the recommendation. >> okay. >> second. >> first and second and, no other members of the public wanting to comment on the item, director harper. >> aye. >> reiskin, oi. >> gee aye. >> nuru. >> that is four aye and item 12 is approved and the next item is 13, supplemental environmental impact statement/environmental impact report update..
>> this item will be presented by john and megan murphy, rod is the lead person for the environmental documents. and megan is the program manager for the contract. >> good morning, directors it is a pleasure to be here, i was going to start off by saying that i am not dennis to present to you. but mark explained that my name is rod, and i am with ae com and i started and have been involved with the project for phase two environmental documents. since it's inaccepting. we got started back in the send of 2012, and we have been in the project for the past four years. i would like to give an up date and in terms of the presentation of the bore members directors are able to see it; is that correct? ? >> and they have hard copies. >> excellent. >> our agenda is divided into four specific parts, the first is to talk about the process,
and second is to give you an understanding and the appreciation of the refinements that comprised the project, and the third part is for identify m of the key impacts that were identified in going through and preparing the draft environmental document, and because we are at the tail end of the environmental review process we want to share with you the major comments that were received on the document and some of the responses that we are drafting right now. i will be pr providing the information on the first and the second and the fourth item. and megan murphy, will be talking about agenda item two. >> so in terms of the environmental review process, this is a very similar process, with unthat you are very, very familiar with. and basically it follows, the california environmental quality act. and results in environmental impact report. i am sorry. >> what we have on this slide are basically the three distinct phases that comprise the environmental documentation, and
the first row is essentially the commencement of the process and the scoping activities. and the second row comprises the technical analysis that leads to a draft and environmental document that is issued for public review, and the third row shows the responses to those comments in the preparation of a final environmental document. >> and now what is different about this process is that first off it is a supply mental environmental document. and that means that we are basically tearing up the 2004, that was completed for the transbay program, and comparing for the document what we are looking no is the extent to which the proposed project, that megan will be describing results in new significant impacts or the impacts that are more severe than what we are presented in the 2004, environmental document, and the supply mental document, the second thing is
that even though we have a single environmental review process, there are two different processes and two different environmental legislations that have been integrated. on one hand, we have the california invier mental contract, and on the other hand we with the policy act because there is a federal action to be taken. at the conclusion of row three, what we have is an action that is going to be taken by the federal lead agency. the federal transit administration and they will issue a record of decision. the comparable -- it is on the tjpa side and the local side for sequa and it will first go ahead and issue the responses to the public comments. and post it on the public website so that it is available for everyone to see. and then, there will be a set of actions that will be requested of the tjpa board at a point in the future. those actions are illustrated on this next slide, basically they are going to consist of
certifying the final document, adopting the findings, and adopting the mitigation and monitoring program, and then, making a determination of the decision about the project itself. what i wanted to share before turning the program over to megan is that on this long journey, there are a number of other participants that have been actively engaged in this process, what we have listed here are the par participating agencies which is the federal term for those public agencies that have an interest in the project and those agencies that are the most responsible for insuring the compliance with the california environmental quality act and the act are the lead agencies. so for sequa, the tjpa is the local lead agency for the federal process, nepa and it is the federal transit administration. and because of the federal rail road, administration interest in the project. and their expertise in this area. they are considered a cooperating agency. now in addition to these particular agency ez, there is
also a host of other participating agencies other agencies with interest in the project and there are three groups in particular, one is city legalitied agency and so the city planning and ocii and there are various transit operators considering the cal train and the other authority and the operators who will be benefiting and using the transit center and there are other federal agents that degree to participate as part of the environmental review process. and what i wanted to note on this particular slide is that each of these agencies was offered an opportunity and was conducted early on and they were offered the opportunity to review the administrative draft documents before it was issued as a public review document and so with that, we will go over the highlights of the project itself. megan? >> good morning, directors, as the executive director noted i'm megan and i am the project manager for the phase two on the program management team, and i will be celebrating 9 years on the program this year, i started as the dtx project engineer, and
prior to that, i worked on the retrofit of the transbay two and the design work on the srit, and the stations in downtown san jose. >> and so i have been tasked with sharing for you the elements that are in the ier, and i know that you are intimately acquainted with all of the elements of the program itself. and on this diagram, you will see the elements that are bubbles in pink and yellow. elements have been added and these elements are new and the elements in yellow are modified as part of it and all of the other elements were cleared in 2004. more about the refinement and we are going to go on the details of these slides, and we are going to whip through them
>> taxi staging along the edge of the transit center itself. and the bart muni underground, and the use of the bicycle and the vehicle controlled vehicle ramp. and the widened throat structure and the rock that provide the temporary construction and support for the tunnel portion. parking at the ac transit bus storage facility. the fourth underground station realignment, and the tunnel stub box which will connect in to the future alignment of the pennsylvania alignment for the rib study should that be selected and additional track wshg on the portion of the alignment. >> we will start at the north and the portions of the alignment. first we have the bart muni connector which was in vision in 2004, however we are settlementing an alignment that goes up beel street, and it is a straight alignment which has the benefit of security. and which we don't have the
curves or bends. and also, it is straight so it is shorter. and that has cost benefits. the next refinement, and this is because of the high speed authority. and it will be the plats form, which means for the double link trains which are 400 meters long, and this allows the full compliance with adc and back in 2004, we envisioned the platforms and this does not allow for the trains to fully be compliant with ada because of the gap forms between the platform edge and the vehicle at the door level. the train box extension goes from beel street to main street, and that will impact the podium structure at 201 mission, for those of you who have been to the office, and djpa office building, and the structure is a
3 to 4, level office building, and it has the loading dock and the garbage facilities for the building. and on top of this newly acquired parcel, the tjpa vision is putting an intercity bus facility that will houls the long distance bus carriers like the grey hound, at the will be on the bus deck, however as the rider ship grows there will be a new place for them to put above the train box extension in the intercity, facility that will allow for more transit on the bus deck level. >> the next refinement on this is the taxi staging which is just along the edge of the transit center itself. >> next is the wide structure and you will see in gray, the original structure. well back in 2004, the high speed rail authority did not
have requirements. they were in their infancy, and so subrequest ent to that they have come up with one of those, and it is a curved or a radius. but they would like to have come in to any facility. so, the 900 foot radius that you see on this diagram, and the outer dash line, is the criteria for the high speed rail for their radius. we worked with high speed rail authority and proposed a design various request that will allow the criteria that will allow it to be reduced to 650 feet, this is the criteria, and this is the rady us that has the least right-of-way of the criteria and radius that we studied. this new alignment of this structure impacts two additional structures. one is at 589 howard and the others at 235 second street, these two structures we are looking forward to studying the
opportunities to under pin during when we receive the money from sfcta that is part of the scope. we are currently optimistic that we will be aible to under pin those structures to minimize the impacts to them. additionally we were able to save the historic structure that was previously slated for demolition, that is at 171 second street, and shown in yellow on this diagram. next is the emergency ventilation and these will be used for the emergency ventilation and emergency egress, and there will be one at east end of the transit center and one at each end of the fourth and townsend station and one that is known on block 12 which is currently owned by the tjpa and it is also parcel request, and i am not sure which one you are familiar with. and that is at second and harrison. and the other structure is at third and townsend street. with he have previously envisioned having it at the mcdonald sight however as you
are aware, that is now currently becoming a 12 story hotel. and so the fta, requested that in the final document, we propose our alternative location, which is on the north side of that intersection, as the proposed location for this ventilation structure. also, as part of our allocation request, we will be looking at opportunities to reduce the surface impacts on townsend street and that includes that ventilation structure at third and townsend. the next refinement is the realignment of the fourth and townsend, underground station, this was at the request of the city, as part of the future endeavor to build out these fourth and king surface rail yard stations, they were concerned by the city that having an underground station, located skewed into the surface station, would limit the future development potential.
and so there was a request by the city, for the tjpa to relocate the station fully into the public right-of-way, so that is what this refinement does. >> in this square you will see not only the additional track work on the southern portion of the alignment but the train, excuse me the tunnel subbox which will allow for that future underground connection should the pennsylvania alignment be selected. also, we have proposed additional track work on the southern portion of the alignment, one is a maintenance of the track which is where cal train will store the equipment they need to actually maintain the track itself, and if were not for the vehicle maintenance and it is actually for the track work maintenance and the second is a turn backtrack. >> this allows the cal train to move the trains from the fourth and king surface station, into the transit center, without backing out on to the main line.
they advised us that we need this track work for the operation. i will hand it back over to rod. >> thanks, megan. >> so, jump back into the environmental draft document as you know the documents will exam as men as 20 different resource topics from air quality to noise to the land use and etc., etc. >> what we are presenting on this particular slide are those five resource areas for which the analysis showed that the pro-he posed project as described by megan would result in a new significant impact or an impact that was more severe than what was reported in the 2004, transbay program environmental document? >> the topics range from transportation to land use to
water resources, and noise and vibration sxr magnetic interference and the type of impact that is associated with each of these different topics or resources, is identified in the second column. so i won't go into the details, but for the water resources it was related to the flood had arz. for the transportation as related to the circulation. around 16th street and you can see that the reason for this this particular impacts just to the right, and it is primarily the turn backtrack that is generating the circulation affected. for the water resources, the hazard issues and impacts that were identified, it is global climate change that is producing the impact that was identified and for noise and vibration, any of the project component pz that might be constructed during the nighttime, could disturb and annoy the nearby residents and sensitive re-septemb
sensitive. >> and two things that i wanted to point out on this particular slide, it seems remarkable that for a project of this scale there are only five particular areas or resources where there might be a significant impact. >> and that is largely because of two reasons, the first is that the project refinement that they described are fairly localize and they are refinements to a much larger program. the necked thing and because we are tearing off the previous document, all of the mitigation measures that are identified in that documents and recommended and adopt and approved, and covered and cut and cover and hifrt i can rye sources things like they are part of this proposed project and therefore, reduce the projects that might otherwise occur. >> in looking at the final column on the slide on the far right, there are two areas where we have identified that the impacts could not be mitigated
to less than significant. in other words, all of these other topics have mitigation measures that will reduce the impact less than significant. the ones that will not be reduced to that level include sea level rise impacts, and the flood hazards associated with the global climate change, we are not in a position alone to go ahead and implement the measures that are going to protect the facility and then it is not an impact of the facility itself, it is the environment on the facilities and second as i mentioned earlier, construction related noise that will occur at night, it has developed a lot of really good measures that have been implemented during phase one and they are likely to be disturbances that occur during the nighttime meeting hours. >> and the next slide, knows that while we talk about adverse impacts, significant impacts, associated with the environmental documents we just want to be mindful and aware that there is a good reason that we are pursuing this project and
so we want to acknowledge and it allows us to acknowledge the effects associated with the project. and the first one being that this does serve as the last mile connection and provides cal train service from the current station to the new transit center. and so doing, what it allows is that some of the passengers that would now have to alight and either walk or transfer to their existing ex-connection to get to the final destinations can continue on and ride all the way to the transit center, as a result some of the pedestrian volumes that have been projected to be extremely significant and substantial in that vicinity things like the central soma and the documents and the cal train, and all point to a high volume of pedestrian movements. and impacts in this area. the dtx project, and the ability to go all the way for that last mile, allows some of the volumes to be reduced because they will continue to ride on to the transit center.
the ability of cal train and high speed rail to continue all the way to the transit center, allows the project both of those projects to realize the reductions in the vehicle miles traveled. the reduction in the greenhouse gas emission and to realize the reductions in the air emissions that have been forecast and those environmental documents and then finally as megan pointed out earlier, the shift in the widened structure allows one of the buildings that contributes to the historic district to be preserved as as opposed to be demolished. >> upon release of the draft environmental document, we received comments from eight different public agencies as well as eight private parties individuals and organizations. and of the 140 or so comments that have been received, we are in the process of completing and drafting our responses to all of those individual comments. and those will be included in the final environmental
document. what i would want to wrap up with, is to give you an overview to some of the ma i jor comments that have been received and with he have tagged these a major comments, because they were raised by a lot of commenters and they represent the areas of controversy and they are areas that are particular interest at a lead agency and yourselves and fta. so the first item has to do with the amount of recognition acknowledgment and the draft environmental document, regarding some of the city planning efforts in the mission bay area. in response what is the environmental document that has done is to recognize all of those different projects to start listed on the slide and to include and incorporate the analysis as appropriate to better provide a context for the impacts around the turn backtrack along the 16th street corridor and how that may or may not effect muni or may not effect the emergency access, so that information is now
incorporated in the document in the final. >> the second major comment that i wanted to bring up is the concerns about cut and cover. construction. and the impacts associated with it. and general, the response refers back to the 2004, environmental document, where the cut and cover, and some extend along second street was already evaluate and there were mitigation measures identified for the pedestrian safety, or the protection of the adjacent buildings of air and noise emissions and all of those things were already mitigated as part of the construction of the impacts and those were all included as part of the proposed project. the other thing that i would note is that the environmental document is required to look at the most plausible worse case scenario.
>> one of the points that you heard from the presentation is that there are going to be opportunities during the next phase of the design to limit the amount of impacts associated with this construction method. >> the third major present that we received had to do with td the turn backtrack and how that will effect the movement along 16th street. and the things that i would like to point out here is that yes, it is true. when the gates are lowered to allow cal train to shuttle back and forth between the cal train rail yard and the new transit center there is going to be intervene ans and there is going to be circulation and delays, associated for the transit for the automobiles for the emergency vehicles and for the best pedestrian and bicyclists and however, it is important to understand that cal train has
committed to operating that turn backtrack only during the off peak hours. and so that there is no intention to shuttle trains back and forth to get to the transit center, neither during the am peak hour or during the pm peak hour when the automobile traffic is the heaviest and the most n congestion and delays are anticipated. >> could i ask you a question on that? could you explain specifically what hours those are? and to what extent that commitment is locked into the environment? >> yeah, i have asked the cal train to come up and help but we do have included in the environmental document, a much better schedule of when the cal train will operate. the use of a turn backtrack. and there is a ramp a period that is in the early morning that starts as early as maybe, four or five, and it will go as late as a little bit after seven, but the idea is to have the trains ready at the transit center for the early morning commute runs, and in the evening
commute runs. >> yes. >> hi, stacey, planning for cal train, electric identification project. so we, just a little bit of history, so we on the kind of reasonable worse case scenario, we had to seem to know the midnight or midday storage as part of the draft document and that looked at about 44 times that we would use the turn backtrack during the day. over the course of a weekday. and we heard that that was not acceptable, and so what we did is took a look to see what we could do to reduce that. and so we looked at ways of having storage over night. and during the midday. and what that ended up in was a reduction of 24 times, and the hours that we would limit to is 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., sorry, 5:00 a.m. to 10 a.m., and four to eight that we would not use the turn backtrack. >> thank you. >> thank you very much stays y >> what that means tho you and
we need to put this in context, so there is no travel across the turn backtrack in the peak hour. it does not mean that there is not going to be delays during the off spaek hours. so over the course of a full day with the 24 crossings that stacey just described there will be a total delay of 28 minutes over the course of the entire day. and with each crossing, we are estimating that the gate down time, and the delays that might be experienced by any of the travelers along the 16th street corridor would be about 70 seconds. and the 70 seconds, in terms of comparable terms will be similar to waiting at a signalled intersection and so over the course of the entire day, 28 minutes of delay, we are not envisioning would be a substantial impact to the transit and the ped bicycle operations. and however, we do realize that for the emergency response, ambulances and emergency transports, that kind of travel time is much, much more urgent
and critical. so, what we wanted to show was that currently the per veiling route that is used by the ambulances to get to the new ucsf medical facilities will use, 16th street which i just highlighted and the vehicles will then continue along owens and then mariposa into the u.s., usfc medical facility. and this is at grade crossing and that is where that could occur with the gates being down. what we have examined is the opportunity for those emergency responders to consider alternate routes. and whether those might be available and accessible. and what we have highlighted on the slide is that there are alternate routes. and that instead of having to use the at grade crossing and being possibly delayed at 16th street, they could go south along mississippi, and then east
along mariposa and the nice thing about that particular alternate route is that it is a grade separated and will not experience the kind of delays that will occur at 16th street. >> i am moving on to the next major comment, there were concerns about the amount of circulation that might be associated with the inner city bus facility, and the first thing that iptded to point out is that there is the bus plaza and a little bit of confusion of the bus plaza. itself it was approved and cleared in the 2004, environmental document. and it is already under construction as part of the phase one transit center and so the impacts related to that would have already been addressed and mid gated as part of the document. what was raised is that to what ex-at the present time might the inner city, bus fa silfy contribute to the additional congestion or delays. the number of trips associated
with the bus are relatively minor i should say chl it is not really adding a substantial amount of new bus traffic on to the street system particularly along main and beel street, one of the reasons why, the way that the bus facility has been designed and it is hard to get orientation from this slide, but the north is down to left and beel street is a street closest to us along the bottom of the slide. and the circulation for the inner city bus facility has the buses coming up main street, coming through the inner city, and then turning down to go back out along beel street. and as a result, if any buses are waiting to get on to beel street to go south, the idea that they would interfere with the traffic flow, will not occur because the buses will wait and cue up in the inner facility bus itself and not resulting in the congestion on the local streets. the second concern that was raised is that if if is the
additional concerns of the nearby driveways, and well the beel street at that particular location is relatively wide and the other driveways that might conflict are offset. and so there is opportunities for those other traffic streams and for the inner city bus facility buses to be able to move in and out without that kind of congestion. >> finally, there were a number of questions that were raised about why can't there be other alternative alignments considered? going into the wide and throat structure,s megan as already explained, we are already at a sweet spot right now. if you were to tighten up the curves, and to make it smaller, you would end up having operational difficulties for the trains, and their ability to enter into the train center itself. wheel squeal will be a possible i am fact, if we were to widen and softn the curve a little
bit, what the slide shows and what the curve shows is that there would be a lot more facilities and buildings and properties on the west side of second street that will be affected. >> so in conclusion what we have learned from releasing the public review draft which was out for 60 days, digesting all the comments, and developing the responses is that there are no significant changes to the conclusions that were presented in the draft environmental document. there are no substantial new analysis or alternatives that need to be considered. in the environmental document. and there are no new mitigation measures that are needed as a result of the analysis that has been performed and some of the additional consideration and clarifications that have been added during the response to comments. so where do we go from here? >> a couple of steps. first, we need fta to go ahead and review the final environmental document, mark has
already provided some wonderful news from the fta that they are not going to be providing additional comments and maybe they will seek clarification but they are in a position and prepared and ready to issue the record of decision, which is the federal action. and the second is that tjpa directors have encouraged all of us to make sure that we are sulting with the city planners and that is something that we need to wrap up, and there are a few details and we are sharing that with them. >> third, as we complete the responses and we get approval from the fta and we are work tg out with the planning department and we will go ahead and issue the responses as required by the state law, ten days in advance, at least, of any board hearing. >> and those responses in the final document will be posted on the tjpa website and, then, it is back to you. and it is back to the tjpa board for actions to consider the certification of the final environmental document, the adoption of the mitigation measures, and the adoption of
the findings and to make a decision about the project itself. if the project does move forward, there is approval then sort of the equivalent of the fta record of decision will be the issuance of the notice of determination by tjpa and that will be posted with the county clerk. >> that concludes our presentation. sorry that went on long, but it was a great opportunity to provide you with an up date and i appreciate that. >> directors have questions? >> just sort of a comment, yeah, i mean that i, the response is no changes is required to the conclusion presented. i mean that is ever, eir that pretty much that i have been involved with, this one in particular, if you concluding that there is no, there is nothing that is necessary because of comment, and particularly with that comment involved the city, where the city is putting that in, as i said before, i want to listen to the city on this. and so you are going to have to come in here with, and first of all, the ten days is not enough
to allow them to do it because when we come in and we hear and stand in front of us, i am going to be listening, so you are going to have to support your no changes, and a lot of those things pretty well. yes, with he appreciate that fully, the ten days is a minimum, and that is established by the state requirements, and if we can get the responses completed sooner, we obviously will, we will make that available, and part of the reasons that we are in the consultations and the discussions with the city light now, is because they have elaborated on some of the concerns and we want to make sthur that we understand those concerns and we are addressing those concerns because as we all know, with he have to move box step with the city and moving both with this project and with the study. and so it, it really probably does not make sense and it is me speaking and speculating for us to move forward with the city planning department is not along with us. >> i agree. >> so i would first concur with
the director harper and i would just again, i would rather have privately but publicly very strongly urge that the final document not get published and be bro ut to consideration to this body until there is that level of concur ans and comfort from the city. i share the concerns that were articulated by the cac chair and particularly with regard to the cut and cover construction. and the 16th street crossing. and i do understand that the environmental document is really just articulating the worse case possible impacts. but, i do have concern on the early slide in terms of the two approval paths, what this board the action that this board is going to be asked to take is not just certifying the document, basically saying that the document has adequately evaluated the impacts, but also,
approving the project. and i can tell you right now, based on my understanding of a cut and cover, approach, and what we heard about 16th street, i would not be supportive of approve thanksgiving pring this. and appoint on the 16th street crossing that the idea of focusing just on commuter peak times is inadequate just from the muni service alone let allow the other possible uses of the 16th street and i understand some transit services have very much the concentration of their rider ship in the peak, and that is not the case for muni on many lines and i assume that this one would be one of them and more than half is traveling outside of the peak and with the existence of the hospital, ucsf hospital, and the warriors and the facility, and we will have significant off peak travel. so the idea that there will be
that level of train traffic at the surface at all, is concerning. but during the daytime, when we are charged with moving people and support of all of the development on the eastern side of san francisco, i don't think that that will be acceptable. so it does, i guess just one other comment, i don't know to what extent there was out reach done by folks who would be impacted by the construction. i'm totally with you on the benefit side, and we need to keep in mind the big picture of the benefits that this project and whatever form it finally ends up in will bring, and i am 100 percent supportive of getting the trains of the transit center and i don't think that it will be worth building phase one if we are not going to get phase two, but i'm concerned that the folks particularly along townsend street and mission ba i and on second street, are not aware of this process. and this project.
and i'm concerned that their concerns probably are not, i don't know exactly who the private folks who send in comments are, but my guess is that there is a lot of businesses and property owners, along that or those and in those three areas, at least, that are not clued in to what is happening here. i think that this is the first time that we have really had a discussion about the environmental process, in this public body. that probably does not have the highest kneel son ratings in a long time. but i am not sure how much this is on the people's radar. but then, the bigger question to me is what is the right environmental strategy given that we do have more than one planning process for this particular project. as we discussed earlier. we are anticipating and we heard, 4 to 6 months that we may get a recommendation that hopefully will be a con sen
sho con ken shoes among the region for something that might be different than this. and so that then raises the question does it make sense for the tjpa to act now on this document, knowing that we may well be pursuing a different alignment, and we may know that and relatively short order. or would it make sense to approve this and go to another supply mental or a different environmental process? i don't know what the answer is to that, but i think that the board will benefit before considering approval of this, supply mental, and analysis of the different ways, the different environmental strategies and it does get back to again, if part of our certifying the eiscir and the supply mental, and includes approving the project, i would not be comfortable doing that at least the way that it is now, in you found that despite the comments, essentially it is all
good and no change is necessary as director harper indicated, then i think that that will be putting at least some smemz members of the board in a difficult decision of having to reject this and so i think that the discussion of how a potential different alignment comes together with the over all approval of the project and the desire of everybody to keep phase two moving i think that that discussion will be helpful for the board before we are faced with the consideration of approving this. >> director, i want to show you that before we bring this item back to the board that we will have the completed consultation with the planning department and we have reached con consensus on what is the next steps, and whether it is the approval or waiting for the results of the rib or waiting for the results and then taking action and so that will be done in consultation with the planning
department. >> thank you. >> if i may, through the share, i just wanted to offer two observations. the first is that we are fully aware that the traffic patterns and the traffic flow in the kirk i lags along 16th street, corridor extends beyond the amp, period and that was part of the reasons for our ongoing consultationwise the city planning staff. it is to better understand how it might effect the better modes of transportation, whether the muni and or bicyclesists or automobile, travelers, and so that is being taken into account as for the developing this revised response, or this updated response. and the second thing in terms of the public out reach, we did fairly closely follow the city's procedures, in terms of their radii for announcing and informing neighboring residents and businesses and etc., of the availability of the draft
environmental document. and so we did do, i think a mailing of over, 4,800 something mailers to all residents and mar cell and property owners in the 300 foot radius of any of the proposed radius. >> and i didn't mean to suggest that i was assuming that the required level of out reach or even suggested level of out reach was not done, i am sure that it was. >> that said, i mean that we have all gotten these notices in the mail, and most of the folks don't pay a lot of attention, but this project at least at the outer bounds of what the environmental document clears, but have very dsignificant impat on the number of buildings and their occupant foz many years. and i just, i'm not convinced that all of the folks who would be impacted are dialed into that despite the good efforts that they have been made in terms of notification.
>> thank you, much appreciated. >> director thank you. >> and i am goaling ing to try follow up, on the comments, since my office is in thard. why the property owners may sh on noise we are relying on them down and it does not work very well. following the legal requirements but getting the general public the better awareness, we have to figure that out, as far as i am concerned this should have been done in 2011. >> how to go beyond the property owners or the residents or he is deny ants and i think that is the miss, and the general public who is walking or biking in the
area. >> i share, with it, and i am used to certifying an environmental document, separate from approving a project. and so on the slide three, you have a bullet that says approved by the project and that is i think, what is little unnerving is that you know, i'm comfortable approving environmental document, and then approving a project as something separate and so i don't know if that was intentional or accidental or i don't know what the process is. the way that we looked at it is that we will follow what has been done in 2004, and i believe that the resolution that was put before the board at that time but don't hold me to it is that all of those actions were put into a separate resolution, but there was a sequence that had to be completed before they could make the decision on the
approval of the project. in this particular insurance stance, i don't know that there is any hesitancy, if needed and if doo he sierd by the board to take the actions and the resolution associated with the certification of the environmental document and then separately, the approval of the projector the discussion of the project. and i think that that might be something better suited for the organization, because there is so many other dynamics, and i'm supportive of clearing an environmental route and given all of the dynamics and that this is in the stoo he and county of san francisco and there are the other issues and alternatives that need to come before, and having an environmental document approved and going against something else in comparing will be beneficial rather than leaving in in limbo, otherwise, this phase two will never be moving forward anywhere, and i don't need to be at this meeting because the train will never get here. so i think finding the right path forward, and being
sensitive to the city's needs are and the tension that is at play. >> i would urge the planning department and the executive director mark and their team to get together and i mean there are so many moving pieces. when this project started in 04, those conditions have changed dramatically. we have heard on the cac, you know, some of these concerns that are not even possible any more, i think. and certain parts and with the plans, that they have put forth and so, the sooner, that you can get together, with the planning department, work on the alignment and tell us you know, what options they are and what is the best way to get the trains which i think will make it for everybody. and as opposed to having these two processes going on. and where we are today. >> and probably should have happened a little earlier than today. >> and we have started our discussions and we have had a
couple of meetings already on the environmental document in the rb and we will continue the discussion with the idea that we are much more involved. and suggests by director reiskin that at some point of time when the effort comes. >> and the important cost also, because as we start to look at different alignments and benefit and the costs and you know, for your -- you know, we could bring the train to the station. >> absolutely. well directors i want to thank you for your input because this was a very important item and it gives us good clarification of how we should be proceeding. >> thank you. >> and we do have two members of the p you believe that want to address you on it. with he have labrun and jim patrick. >> patrick and company, i tried to get a copy of this environmental impact report, i
am sort of a paper guy, you know that i am in the papter business, they wanted 500 and something dollars for this report. we are talking about billions of dollars here. it seems to me that we should fund some of this to get the information out on the public. it is on the internet. number two, this is golelg gook at the highest level, and i never seen such crazy stuff, this organization, and this organizati organization. this is it not good government, this an outsider looking in, and i am glad that i don't run my business like this. number three, i thought that you would approve this report, i projecting one of the things that will be in this report and this is my prediction, are we on the record? >> roland has come up with a great alignment thought that solves a lot of problems. i suggest that in this report, it will say that this alignment is not part of the scope and therefore we will not pay any
attention to it. and that will be the analysis that the report will produce. that will be a tragedy. that should be evaluated. why are we doing these things? i just don't know. sometimes we shoot ourselves in the foolt. i would love to get a paper copy of this report, once against, the $500 and this is over and beyond the top. and so, i decided that i would wait. i didn't buy it. >> thank you so. i was not here last month, i was very surprised when the directors say that there was just one letter from the planning department but i am glad that we found the other one in 15, and one of thechl was mine and i believe that you received copies of it shortly afterwards. but the first thing that i would like you to talk about is this alignment, and earlier with he discussed. and this alignment is fatally flawed for the very simple reasons that you cannot possibly construct that alignment.
because, those are too sharp, and that is the end of that discussion. and so, if you on the alignment which was on the third street and there are issues with that. you can actually all the way up to the station, and you still have this massive station in second street, and then, since you are burning essentially a block to a block and a half of the existing box, and you are forced to have the extension box, which is another 400 million, and by the way, you are losing a full length platform in the process and, so five years ago, i came up with a different -- and i just going to work you very quickly now, and back and then explain to you what it results, and essentially, starts around skchlt ezar and all of that comes out and basically goes up by rail and it repurposes the existing abandoned tunnel. so next to the cal train, and
then it is a 22nd street and then is starts boring by the time that you hit, 16th street you are 16 feet underneath, and then it lines up the 7th street on the station that is there between 7,000 and then you start 7th street and start curving, and roughly alines up with the howard and then it approaches the transbay transit center directly at that way, the first thing that it did is eliminates the station and for your left is between -- and it is also completely eliminates the box extension, because you are able to now move all of the platform one block to the second street. in also solves that there is no sequence reminding other than a couple of cross overs but we don't have time to drive on that. yes, if actually moves the station closer to ucsf, which i
think that is better than the townsend location. those turn back tracks i got. okay? that was the end, and i can't believe that nobody ever comes and confusing the terminal once it is full length you can actually store 6, 16, cal train trains in there. sorry 12. and the last thing that it does is it actually allows to you get there in one minute which is important because there are so young men that are able to get from there to the transbay in 30 minutes or less. thank you. >> that concludes the members of the public this time you are schedule to go into closed session, we do have a number of the public that wants to address you on the item listed, that is jim patrick. >> sorry. not sorry, i am happy to be here, i am happy to be here, jim patrick, and relative to the
closed session i have read about what is going on with this thing, it seems to me that this is not going well fl an outsider looking in. my kind of recommendation since we have moved to the opening of this terminal to march that is the way that i read the tea leaves is that we go back and say this bid is just no good, forget it, and we are going to reright the spe identifications and rebid this whole thing having learned what some of the problems are. going into the closed session? you can take that under consideration. thank you. >> thank you. >> all right. >> that does conclude the members of the public that wanted to address you on the items listed and we can go ahead and clear the room. >> okay. >> the tgpa board directors meeting is now back in open session, and the council will announce on the report of closed session. >> item 16, conference for the legal council, regarding
existing let gages litigation, there is no action to report. on the item 17, con frons with the real property, negotiators regarding the transbay, transit center, and there is no action to report. >> and directors that concludes your agenda for today. >> we will adjourn the meeting of the joint bay power authority. thank you.again.
>> (clapping.) >> good afternoon, everyone welcome to to city hall so i want to thank everyone for being here on this lovely valentine's day and we really have an important message we want to share with everyone and that is that on the valentine's day we want to make sure that everyone feels loved and included here in san francisco and by that we need to make sure we provide housing for everyone that want to live and work here for generations to come. >> (clapping.) >> so today, we're joined by people my colleague ahsha safai will acknowledge but bring up our mayor of the city that has been working to make sure our housing policies enable future generations to live in san francisco with that, mayor ed lee. >> thank you. >> (clapping.) >> katie and supervisor safai joining on that valentine's day
rally for housing yeah. got a lot of love in the house and a lot of the labor leaders they're showing their love they love building they love living in the city, too, we have all the residents who is to us we need more restrictive housing for everyone and so this is a time to make bold announcements with the board of supervisors and the mayor's office get together we do bold things we are in agreement we do things like from the city college we don't mess around why not more middle-income housing for first responder and working class folks all of the different levels of people need more housing in the city we can build rehab and one thing in 2014 i said we needed a
housing plan i know said that to john rahaim his staff was going nuts not getting all the permits out get them out faster at the knew and the public knew we announced thirty thousand rehab housing by 2020 well, today, because everyone is middle-class and working together 17 thousand one hundred of units have been completed >> (clapping.) >> 36 affordable inform middle-income and low income we have to keep it going working very hard and build and when we work together we can get stuff done today we are announcing something i really am excited about supervisor katie tang is reinching home sf home sf is a working with our developer community with the neighborhood
with our labor leaders we can do more than that zoning if we provide more incentives this is what working with the board will be helpful in doing so with the home sf program over 6 to 8 hundred more restrictive units can be built in the city for middle-income and families throughout the city i'm excited with the supervisors come up with creative ideas i'm sorry 6 thousand did i say - 6 thousand units i'm getting excited when we are initiative at the same time our residents say we have to be practical whether we work together both can be accomplished with quality housing that all of our units represent and our nonprofits help to manage and the you city we are refugesized your public
housing portfolio not see combe e delipidated housing you'll see housing that mixed use and the residents are the same people but with a lot more restrictive hope excited about working with the board let's get more housing for everyone let's have a great valentine's day. >> thank you, mayor ed lee and we're announcing a renewed effort around a program designs for middle-income and working-class families guaranteeing new projects thirty percent for working-class families and a requirement that over 40 percent of units are at least two bedrooms or grooemz e three bedrooms to serve our families that want to have children. >> (clapping.) >> so we will be bringing forgot legislation in the board of supervisors in the coming months and hope you'll join you
there's a lot of things happening this in the federal government there might be people that don't want to include us in the country in san francisco we embarrass diversities we really need to walk the talk and build the housing that is inclusive and not begun that for generations i hope you'll join me and the people that working hard in our city we want to make sure they remained housed in san francisco with that, i'm going to turn it over to my partner on this valentine's day my work partner supervisor safai. >> that was great, thank you katie i'm your partner for today happy valentine's day i'm supervisor ahsha safai and first want to acknowledge the men and women in labor plumbers local 38
and local 261 exaggerates 22, and the janitors local 87. >> (clapping.) >> the people's are here unfortunately in the city we've gone to the extreme and becoming a city of the/88 we have to make drastic steps in the housing policy the only way to house people to make a bold step so we're here to say that is time to step forward for working people and step up for working families and need to begin to make them a priority in my district prior to the great recession you could find an
affordable housing but now homes are north of one million dollars in the sunset homes well noting of one million dollars in the bloifts approaching one million dollars not for working-class and the market took care of of itself but our chances and opportunity to make a bold move and steps towards working families over the decades produced 23 thousands of low income housing when a redevelopment agency we produced housing for working-class but no consistent funding stream for working families i'll repeat no consistent funding stream for working families so if you're a janitors if you're a laborer if you're a pledgeer or carpenter
and a hotel working or noose no housing designed for you, we don't have the funding we need to make bold steps in the coming weeks we'll talk about inclusionary but i stand here today in full support of everyone that supervisor katie tang we need to step up for working class families. >> (clapping.) >> when the teachers are trying to get housing and have the lands for free they've come across the reality money streams there is funding for the paraprofessionals but not funding streams for teachers when we can't fill the positions we're in a entries around housing for working people an important aspect of what makes our city strong the next person
i want to bring up local local 261 speak from their appreciative mr. josh. >> (clapping.) >> thank you supervisor safai and thank you, of course, to supervisor tang for bringing in forward and to the mayor and all of us we at local 261 join the others members of the building and construction trade to do something special over the past several years that's the most successful hiring program in the country. >> (clapping.) >> a wouldn't have been possible without the leaders from government and lavish and housing advocates but that breaks down it all breaks down having a chance for local resident to get a job working with the trades from the community and breaks down when they seek to support their families and started a family and be a local hire in san francisco it breaks down when you don't have housing
so this is a follow proposal here to talk about working families and middle-income housing generated and building trades everybody coming together like i said local hiring works when we have what? >> housing what do we forbode to build. >> housing human resources all right. let's pass this law. >> thank you next i'll have to say we can't do this would you the planning department we're trying to solve the challenges we need smart people on the ground firsting the out the details i'll bring up director rahaim but the team hope sf and (calling names) thank you all so much >> (clapping.) >> thank you xrifr and good morning and happy valentine's day i'm proud to be here to work
on this gram as the mayor said he gave us a charge to say let's if you get a way for more restrictive moderate and housing we developed a basis and proud to be here i think we agree that families with children are the integral part of the intent for the middle and moderate housing meets the city's goals to solve the housing crisis will have housing for working-class and thirty percent of all new housing will be permanently affordable and 40 percent are required to include two bedrooms or more restrictive and challenging in san francisco are here we've got a lot more work to do this is an sdwralg part and the most significant program we can put together we've working on in a very long time but part of a multi faceted
program for an important role in keeping families in the city i really look forward and want to acknowledge the mayors leadership and supervisor tang's leadership we're looking forward to working with that to move forward and get housing built thank you very much. >> (clapping.) >> so thank you for being here and again everyone that as a partner so many advocates if you can raise your hand if you support more restrictive housing in san francisco. >> so amazing to see all the grassroots support for more restrictive housing and, of course, we know yes, their our neighbors that maybe be obtainable to more restrictive housing but we need to include all the working-class families on this valentine's day i forgot you not we'll build more housing for all of you so thank you very much for being here adjourned.
you'll know what to expect after completing the process. hi, there are i'm deputy and i'm part of the clean slate team. the first thing we will need to know whether your despicable to have our convictions dismissed can't be on parole or currently charged with a crime or serving a sentence and it must be from san francisco. while your colleagues will get to know your circumstances there are 3 steps. getting the clean slate process started it simple you can get them done in the same day. first fill out an application and they can be opinioned on sf
defender.org. next you'll obtain a copy of your rap sheet that's a rap sheet going 80 the hall of justice at 850 bryant street on the fourth floor. the bureau is open monday through friday from 8 to 5. it's located one block away from the public defender's office you'll need to bring our photo id. finally, there's your our own your rap sheet to the front desk. you'll receive a letter from 2 to three weeks explaining the next steps. let's review the 3 steps if that fillist the police stations and
on your police station and 3 deliver our rap sheet and application $0.40 to the defender. it can help with financial aid for colleagues. i want you to meet a client who did the clean slate program he refunds a nonprofit literary series. please meet joe. peep at the clean slate program worked with me today, i i am an author of 3 books a husband and a father would you recommend clean slight to another person >> i would definitely recommend that. so, now you have a better understanding of the gibt address benefits of the clean slate program as well as highway
to get started. let's hear some common questions. keep in mind those are general questions you'll you may be seated with an attorney who be provide more information based on our circumstances >> just to be clear i don't have to tell my employers will my ejections. >> yes. as well as convictions that have been dismissed. if someone runs a criminal background they'll see the charges but it's dismissed. you will be able to legally tell your employers person never convicted >> i don't to tell anyone is there a way to rears them. >> there's some cases you can.
maybe you're arrested because police thought you were someone else. wound our arrest record is sealed you can say you were never >> if i wanted to clear my record if i was convicted of a felon. >> it is also known as a one letter officer the clean stating hit. >> may be able to get it raersz but if i went to prisoner you may quality for a correspondent certified document saying you're a lay abating citizen are. you had should be aware for some state jobs state agencies are
allotted to consider our criminal history. those jobs are private security jobs health care workers and other careers involving the children the i can sick or elder. it will benefit you human resources here's some of the things clean slate can't do it doesn't prevent an old conviction to there the sense of a new criminal action. the court might connotes more sentences even if it been submit you can't own or polgs possess a firearm. if it bars you from carrying an firearm eclipsing our record won't change that. submittal doesn't rove a sex
ejection. if you're required to register as a sex offender that process will continue even if your record has been cleared, however, other forms of royalties maybe eligible. we look forward to helping you move forward with your life ♪ ♪ so, now you know a little bit more about the program we encourage you to apply go the sf purifyi purifying.org or stop by any place for our clean slate program. our team looks forward to
serving >>[gavel] >> good afternoon it is now 1:07 pm. this is the regular meeting of the commission of community investment and infrastructure. the successor agency commission to the san francisco redevelopment agency for tuesday, march 7 2017. welcome embers of the public. madame sec. please call the first item >> item first order of business is item 1 roll call please respond what i call your name pimentel present bustos present singh here bustos dear mdm.
chairman rosales is absent. in all other members of the commission are present. the next order of business is item 2, announcements. the next regular scheduled meeting will be held on march 21 2017 at 1 pm room for 16 good item b announcement of prohibition of some electronic devices during the meeting. these, be advised the ringing and use of cell phones pagers and similar sound producing electronic devices are prohibited at the meeting. these, be advised through chairman nehru ordered the removal from the meeting room of any sound producing electronic devices. c announcement of time allotment for comment. these be advised the member has up to 3 min. to make public comment on the agenda item unless the
commission adopts a short period on any arrogant strongly recommended members of the public who wish to address the commission the loud speaker card so that the completed part that commission secretary. the next order of business item 3, report of actions taken on previous closed session meeting if any. there's no reportable actions. the next order of business is item 4, matters of unfinished business. there's no matters of unfinished business. the next order of business is item 5, matters of new business consisting of consent and regular agenda. first consent agenda 5-8 approval of minutes february 7, 2017 mdm. vice chair >> mdm. sec. to have any speaker cards for this item queen >> i do not >> since we don't have any-is there anyone who like to speak on these items and see mr. james over there?. for the next one. okay. hearing none, no request to speak on them up close public comment and i'll turned to my commissioner
-fellow commission members for the comments and questions? no questions? to have a is there a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> so the motion to approve the minutes of february 7, 2017 has been moved by commissioner bustos and seconded by commissioner singh. mme. sec. please take a piece roll call >> pimentel aye bustos aye singh aye mondejar aye the vote is for aye and one absent >> okay. the motion carries. i'm secretary please call the next item >> next-door businesses regular agenda five-be authorizing a permanent loan but i will square this lp in amount not to exceed 12 $12,986,000 for low income
family rental housing house griffith public housing site 2000 release walker dr. and updated replacement housing plan in adopting environmental funding pursuant to the california environmental quality act bayview-hunters point the development project area. discussion and action resolution number 11-2017. mme. interim director's >> good afternoon commissioners through the chair at this is phase for of the house griffith redevelopment. one other note you've approved a predevelopment loan on this item as well as the schematic design and this is just the next phase in that process. we have jeff white here who's the program manager will be presenting and we also of the development team for any audience as well.
>> thank you director sesay. again jeff white housing program manager. this item is related to the four phase of the redeveloped of the house griffith public housing should also give a brief update on the progress on the first three phases. house griffith has been redeveloped as part of the oss initiative i'm presenting for a list be the senior development specialist who's out of the office of a brief leave. you've seen her before on many previous house griffith items. as you know, hope sf is a multisector initiative with the goal of eradicating generational poverty. the initiative to rebuild four of san francisco's most socially isolated public housing communities including house griffith into vibrant mixed communities and reconnect them to their neighborhoods and the greater city. per the terms of the dda, ocii has five point will complete the horizontal infrastructure related to alice griffith. five points predecessors selected mccormick
born and salazar to develop the affordable housing in alice griffith. in addition to ocii and five point the house griffith revitalization team members include the mayor's office of housing and community development, ocd with the mayors hope sf team the san francisco housing authority whose a current owner and operator of house griffith, and then urban strategies who's implementing the social service program at alice griffith. our nonprofit development partners for faces 1-3 sorry, one in three are [inaudible] and phases two and four is tabernacle community development corporation. as you know, the housing authority received a $30.5 million choice neighborhoods initiative grants also known as a seeing eye implementation grant the us
department of housing and urban development. 221.3 5 million of the grant was for construction of the new units. maynard is for services and community improvements. see an eye funds are being used on the first three phases of the house griffith with the first three phases in construction we are on schedule to meet the seeing eye deadline. the current development plan has alice griffith and redeveloped in six phases on the seven lots. the new alice griffith development would include one-for-one replacement of all of the 256 public housing units was the additional of 248 new affordable units. tax credit units. the first three phases are on the three large blocks around a religious water which are adjacent to the existing public housing. phases one and two are currently under construction in both phases are
due to be completed by the end of next month. block one at a really us walker and carol is phase 3 and that's started construction in february of 2016 and on schedule to be completed in november of this year. once the public housing policeman units have been built the housing authority will transfer vacated land 25 point two develop proper for development is markedly inclusionary workforce housing. in october 2014 the commission approved a master agreement that governs these land transfers and resulting site reconfiguration. this slide shows a description of the types of units and incomes served for all components of the new development. there are categories of the affordable units which includes public housing replacement and tax credit units and those will serve 50% ami and below. they
are also 279 workforce and inclusionary units which will primarily serve families between 120-160% ami. consistent with the purpose of principles to minimize displacement residence main on site during construction. the construction of the housing units will be faced with the new units being constructed before any housing is demolished. the development is plans of the residents will likely only have two [inaudible] move once to new units. all existing tenants will have the opportunity to up up up occupy the new units. housing authority is responsible for implementation of the relocation plan and five point pays all the local relocation cost. the services program at alice griffith and hope sf sites is being overseen by the mayors hope sf team to
urban strategies has been providing on-site services to residents at alice since 2010 to ensure they would be able to participate formally in the planning of the new development and to ensure that they're able to be successful once they move there. currently, support services on-site have been funded primarily by the seeing eye grant. c and i grant. the alice griffith degree of almonds probably support in the community. alice griffith inclusion in the hunters point shipyard at candlestick point, page phase to come up project resulted in extensive public review with hundreds of meetings since 2007. both the hunters point shipyard citizens advisory committee and the former bayview-hunters point project area committee supported a larger project that and alice griffith's
revitalization. it continues to support the alice griffith project. alice griffith it's up as an active tenant association and about a team along with urban strategy am ocd hope sf and oc site staff meet regularly with both groups. given the extreme habitability problems that can't exist at the site alice griffith tenants showing strong support for the site's revitalization. as you heard when you approve the schematic designs for phases 1-3 they been very involved in the design and opponent process for the new alice griffith. as i mentioned phases 1-3 are under construction to these phases have 306 units with 207 units being public and hoping housing replacement units. nbs urban strategies [inaudible] tabernacle and sf housing authority have been working with residents for the past
several months to move the new public housing replacement units next month and in early may. the development team of ocii staff also began early outreach for the new affordable units in phase 3 earlier this year with the approval of an early outreach plan in january the mailing to coc holders and february of this year, last month. in july two rental readiness workshops for cop holders will behold so the be ready when the application process begins in september. i've a few slides they give an update on sp small business enterprise and workforce goals. we have really strong numbers on the professional services you can see 80% small business enterprise. 70% san francisco sbe, 47% minority owned businesses and 7% minority and
women owned businesses and 6% women owned businesses. construction and supplies similarly numbers. 54% small business 47% san francisco small business-i'm percent minority owned business, .1% minority and women owned business and 2.1% women owned businesses. in your packets there are-there's a bios of these local businesses working on alice griffith. for construction and workforce to date on phases one-three you have the numbers on this slide. phase 1 is 36% san francisco, 19% w hunters point and 56% minority. 5% women phase 233% san francisco 70% bayview-hunters point and 57%
minority. at 3% women. phase 3, 34% san francisco i'm a 14% babies hundred .56% minority and 5% women. today we're asking for your approval of several items related to phase 4 of alice griffith. on the map phase 4 is the wedlock on the slide. to give you some context. there's also some information on future neighborhood amenities in transit in and around the site. block five was originally part of a larger phase for good luck five is now available for development but the next two-the next other phases in phase 4 among blocks eight and 14 will be available for several years. as a result, by moving block five into phase 4 and living forward with the project now, it allows the
delivery of some tax credit units that were previously planned. the development team decided to shift the block five unit mix so that four and five units not needed for public housing replacement were changed to smaller units sizes one and two bedroom units and resulted in an increase unit count at block five. that was in part related to the current household composition of alice which has skewed toward smaller household sizes. as household competitions compositions change over time the development team continues to look at the household sizes in preparation for the alice griffith phases one to be based on the current household sizes abided by the housing authority
pays for split between public housing replacement and new affordable units with further updated and therefore a need for -as there's a need for more smaller units. so this slide shows the split between public housing replacement units and new affordable units at predevelopment loan approval and compares it to the proposed new mix your staff recommends allowing the second director of ocii and the director of ocd to approve a further shift up into the time of the close of the construction financing based on the needs of the existing residence at the time. we will have more information at the time because folks love in moving into alice one and two. the developer is now requesting a gap funding commitment for construction in order to up like for [inaudible] for the 4%
loan tax credits and the tax exempt bond financing. the maximum ocii loan amount for the project will be 12 million $.986 thousand and we hope to have a term of 55 years and an interest rate of 3%. with the authority given to the executive director of ocii and the direct of ocd to prove a decrease down to zero or send as a part of the final financial plan for the project if one or both of these phases require a lower interest rates remain compliant with the irs requirements. the final action for your approval this afternoon is the updated replacement housing plan. the current 256 units at alice griffith are mix of 12 and three bedrooms - excuse me - one, two, three, 45 adam units.
the public housing replacement will be to an 56 units also including all the bedroom sizes but the exact unit mix will reflect the unit size needs of the existing residence in among the existing residences greater need for one, two, three and bedroom units the lesser need for four and five bedroom units. however, pursuant to the community redevelopment law crl section 33415.5 of the california health and safety code, we are required to rebuild the exact unit number and mix. i will call these crl replacement units of the new tax credit units. for example we are building fewer four-bedroom public housing replacement units to reflect the existing household composition. we are still propagated to build [inaudible] bedroom units. in april 2014 the commission approved replacement housing plan. for the first three phases of development of alice and no
demolition will occur at alice griffith prior to the completion of the first three phases. we currently anticipate the demolition to begin in 2018 and be complete to like 2020. the crl new tax credit placement units we built on-site at the new alice griffith developed and on to your bike 100% of ford housing parcels at candlestick, 11-80 and 10-8. the affordable the levels of these units will be set at or below the affordable the level of the existing units. this slide shows replacement units being built in the first three years of the purposes of crl requirements. when the first three phases when these three phases are complete by the end of 2017 ocii's obligation to build 12 and three bedroom units will be met and exceeded. in total 303 units at or below the affordability of the existing units will have been built. but we will still need to provide
50 four-bedroom units and 16 five bedroom units. here is the updated plan which addresses ocii's intention to fulfill this obligation. we will be providing 10 of the four-bedroom units and three of the five bedroom units required by crl in phase for which we started construction in july it will be providing five of the four-bedroom units and one of the five bedroom units in the nearby candlestick 10-811-a good reminder of the units we placed in the last two phases of alice griffith. thank you these phases is not complete unto the extent a sufficient number four and five bedroom units are not included in the [inaudible] staff will update the plan antenna by other sites within ocii's jurisdiction for purposes of fulfilling crl replacement housing obligations.
before i finish, i'd like to review the project schedule. later this month the developer will be submitting an application for allocation for tax-exempt bond financing. alone income housing tax credits. construction is expected to start in july of this year and will be completed in october of 2018. so that wraps up my presentation for you today. before we take public comment and questions i like to introduce a key members here today. if you want to stand or raise your hand, we have [inaudible] was president of the alice griffith tenants association. daniela gravelle with mccormick and salazar. pauline-with nbs, and use of freeman also nbs. and dr. james mcrae. thank you. and-from five
point and all other davis from five point. he is not here. okay. elizabeth chilton with san francisco housing authority. lisa-with them ocd hope sf. in isaac-with urban strategies. thank you. >> thank you mr. white. adam sec. to we have any speaker cards? >> i have three speaker cards. >>[calling public comment cards] >> commissioners, i'm terry
anderson anderson foundation. community-based organization that works with ex-offenders. men and women in and out of drug rehab. living in district 10. my question is that i would like to have an understanding if there will be community benefit money for organizations such as anderson anders works with ex-offenders but ex-offenders in the city of san francisco percent of what largest concentration in district 10. we know how they represent public housing. so, my mission statement is, to break the cycle of recidivism
is through job opportunities. now here we are affording the rebuilding of public housing projects. how many of these people will be afforded the opportunity to work on this particular project we, the community organizations within district 10 will be afforded financial support to be able to support clients within the projects? so it is within my preview that i am before you to ask that other organizations that arts also have an interest in this particular area, as far as the men and women to live in public housing as well as in the area, be given an opportunity to work with the clients. also i would like to be i have it put on notice, why can't the residence be given a
financial incentive of having their rent paid as a part of the ability to purchase these units so they can be part of this project? instead of always having to deal with being renters? why can't we have money that they are paying for the rent go towards a purchase agreement so they can deal with having ownership within these units? it is time to be able to recognize if you're just want to tear down a unit and build a new unit and have them still as renters, they are not gaining any financial asset. as you have dealt with-thank you. >> thank you. >> o james risen of
bayview-hunters point. 19 city to i remember when it first opened alice griffith projects. they look nice then but years afterwards they found out community found out, that the materials they used were third grade materials. why those buildings started tearing down like they did. way before this particular development that were three-story buildings there that they had to tear down in the alice griffith projects. what i hope is with this development, they use grade 8 material. i support the project 100% and i also ditto on what terry anderson before me spoke on. but i think it is time to train some of those residents in-house griffith to be landlords and also have
opportunities when they build these different facilities in alice griffith may start [inaudible] trained those people in those housing projects to be able to work in the childcare centers and work in the different stores and store ownership of the community , or this committee or city should invest in the tenants so they become self-sustaining, have opportunities to pay the rent, because if you don't have a job you can't pay your rent. that's for everybody and anybody but i just hope that this project helps the community more than just having low income housing can help them to become self-sustaining and viable citizens indeed bayview-hunters point community. we need that badly. thank you very much. >> thank you mr. james. >> the cards
>> good afternoon my name is [inaudible], resident of alice griffith and i'm excited for the project coming up. i am a mother of seven and three grill to grandchildren so i support the project i'm involved in it so please, thank you so much for listening to the project coming out because i've great relationship with the people that [inaudible] they show us the opportunity and i see it's coming. right now, i'm enough four-bedroom and i encourage a lot of people when the four-bedroom is available, go forward. tomorrow is not a promise that this is a great opportunity and i think all of the colleagues that came out and showed us opportunities for bringing don't like to the alice griffith. god bless everybody. >> thank you. >> >>[calling public comment cards]the commissioners my name
is alan norman pres. of bayview merchants association. bayview-hunters point. resident for over 70 years. and i'm coming before you. i'm in favor of the project, too, but the way it stands with you guys sitting up here, getting your little reports from these people that work for you and looking at papers and stuff and not really knowing what's going on in the community, you need to start walking the walk and doing something other than just talking the talk because all you do is set up here and talk about what you're going to do but you don't do nothing. you talk you don't walk. you don't do none of that. you don't do
nothing about contractors out there being driven and going brock because of certain contractors that you and the developer himself are allowed to work out there and cause people to go bankrupt and everything because the laws on the books that you are supposed to reinforce to make sure that people out there who are business people get treated fairly. you could not come out to try to enforce them. we are in favor of the project but not as far as it being administered. the way it's administered and the way you're overseeing it anything. the owner can come to you at any time for anything and you will go ahead and give it to us but you never want to find out how the business people live in bayview-hunters point got down. did all [inaudible] city hall and everywhere else to bring this project out there and then this new five point thing and this
five-point thing is not a good deal for nobody. first was [inaudible] back to change their name because the reputation is so bad out in the community could they change from benard to five point and so you can go out there shopping centers just like the one in walnut creek. isn't nobody became walnut creek money. so how are we supposed to get [inaudible] and everybody knows that going out there and looking at the construction and the layout of the different buildings out there those houses are not being built for anybody who resides in bayview-hunters point. those are billed for the yuppies that you're bringing in from other places. but give us an opportunity to work on the project then if we work on a project you want to make sure that we get paid. we just want to set up and have us come down here complaint you every week
and you sit on your duff and not do anything. talk about having a meeting that is not on the happen because you're too lazy to come here and help some people that can't help themselves because they put all the responsibility so all you have to do is say, yes, we are doing this and don't do nothing. >> thank you mr. norman. >> >>[calling public comment cards] >> good afternoon commissioners. i name is mindy kanner. i work with andrews and anders peer i got a call yesterday from a young lady who was incarcerated whiz from alice griffith and she wants to get back in her unit. she needs
$781, tools, were close, and there's nowhere to go to help people with [inaudible] this is something that comes up every day in public housing. you need to set aside money for barrier removal. it's very easy to incarcerate people, $60,000 a year and it's very difficult to get $1000 to put someone to work. so i implore you to look at some budget budgetary money to appease him and women up in these public housing units to get back to work. they want to go to work. they see it happening outside their door every day that they see people going to work. they have barriers to employment that, to me, $1000 can help somebody is not very much money.
incarcerating them is a lot more difficult. thank you. >> thank you. do we have any more speaker cards? >> no more speaker cards. >> okay. drano for the request to speak on this item i will close public comments. i now turn to my fellow commission members for their comments and questions. yes, commissioner singh >> there's a four bedroom and five victim who gets [inaudible] on those >> what is the requirement? >> yes. what to get a five bedroom hold >> tousled bedroom size would be the household +1. the minimum size household for a four bedroom would be five people. >> what is the end for that? >> the rent? i can tell you that. just a second. daniela
from nbs knows the answer below, with the developer. so there are two types of units here. for returning public housing residents they require 30% of their income up to a certain rent. i don't have that on me but it's a low rent for a 4-5 bedroom unit. >> when are you going to have it? >> i don't have it with me right now. basically these are for tenants who make up to 50% of the area median and the computer is also just tax credit rent tax credit units that are for residents in the general public look onto a lottery process. there are no five bedrooms for those residents but the four bedroom
rent is $1454 per someone who makes 50% of the area median income. >> that's very low income. they can afford $1400 a month? >> these are federally set rents. >> for people who are under that. one other question. the interest rate is 3%. >> >> that is correct. 3% >> [inaudible] for how long? >> they said it between 3-0% as a result of negotiations with a tax credit investor. they sometimes need a lower interest rate to limit the losses and to ensure that compliance with irs regulations are met.
>> is 55 years right? >> that is correct. that's the term >> it just a long? >> yes. it's just a long. >> thank you. >> commissioner pimentel >> i the question on [inaudible] what are the relocation costs and what is the process reviving the relocation for the tenants? >> okay. on the return to elizabeth tilton at the housing authority to address that. >> what are the relocation costs and then what is the process for relocating the tenants? >> so the relocation costs? relocation costs for the tenants, unit? >> yes. >> the relocation of us are mitigated by the housing
authority. we cover the-each resident will have an option whether they want a self allowance and that is a fixed allowance fee that's determined by the federal hwy., association. and if you would like i can give you those amounts. so for one bedroom apartment it's considered three rooms furnished that would be $1165. for a two-bedroom apartment which is for rooms finished would be 1375. 83 bedroom again two additional rooms furnished is $1665. a four bedroom apartment is $1925. a five bedroom apartment is $2215 and then it goes up to eight rooms furnished and that's 2505 and each additional room furnished is considered to
an 65. now with the alice griffith site there are no units that are over five bedroom that would be the cap. again five-point covers those costs and then they also have the option of a commercial mover in the commercial mover is provided by the housing authority the housing authority pays the commercial moving company directly. so there is no cap. >> you had another question, sorry? >> commissioner bustos >> so i don't know if it's a question or comment. mr. norman has come up and said a lot about the work that we are trying to do here. as you know mr. norman we been trying really really hard to do what is right by redeveloping did
wrong. i'm a little concerned about the comments. i think the project itself is worth approving and moving forward. however, we been through this road before the contract is not being treated correctly. i know we try to talk about that so maybe we need to revisit that conversation did mr. norman we could go to bayview. we had a meeting in february in the community which is something that i was very proud that we did. because it's about going out and being with people that maybe we need to do something else because if there's concerned about how people are being treated, especially the contractors that we have pushed
so hard that we pushed the developers quite a bit, i think and i think we've done a good job of making sure that the developers, whether it be lennar, five point whatever name they want to use, or even mbs, that was about really making sure that it was a lifting everybody up. now if there's an issue about how people are being paid and how smaller contractors are being treated than that something we need to have a serious discussion about once again with confidence that our interim director could help us do something like that is i think it's something that's serious. he did not push to have it so that small businesses go bankrupt. that was not our intention at all. let me finish. our intention was to make sure that we lift up the community that it's a win-win for everybody. but if there still issues going on that i think we need to take a look at that in a very serious way and bring in our attorneys,
bringing other folks to say let's take a look because it's not the spirit, it's not part of the spirit of what we were trying to do here as a commission. the latter part of reed obama wins existing to now ocii. so going back to the project, this particular project, mbs you were hearing what has been a concern so i hope you take to heart some of that and i hope you take to heart some of the issues around how we invest in the people especially the residence of alice griffith. so long time coming and i hope that we are able to do right by them but i think the project itself is something that should go forward . the other issues will definitely take a look at it i think you have the commitment of all of us here including our chairwoman commissioner rosales
to take a look at it. so it's not necessarily a question. more of a comment of this project and of the issues surrounding get so thank you. >> thank you commissioner bustos. i do have a couple of questions. i also support this project and i just need some clarification because you earlier said there were like 4-5 bedrooms and so my understanding is whenever the existing configuration of the buildings, how many one bedroom, two bedrooms, 4-5 bedrooms left replace it the equivalent replacement. yet at the same time i understand that there was some survey done that there will be less five bedrooms and less for bedrooms. so i just need to clarify how was the conversion of that and why would they changed?
>> sure. i will address that. there's one way to think about it is this to him or talk about replacement units this two types of replacement units. so one is the replacement the one-for-one replacement of the public housing units. so for every units that is being demolished eventually to be a replacement unit. but those units will be replaced with the appropriate unit size that's required by the household. in other words over time, i can right now there are some units in the existing alice griffith that are you could say folks are over house. there might be two people in a four bedroom should i don't know if that's an exact number, but what you
say as an example. the ideas of the public housing replacement units that's based on-is every the same number 256 units but the configuration of 12, three, four, five bedrooms is based on the existing need of the household that's in place at the time. that is something that is continuing to change because people have lives and get married, died, have kids, etc. so the household compositions are possibly changing. so that is the public housing replacement unit and then on top of that, or in addition we have the community redevelopment law requirement that we replace a unit, the same composition of the units that we demolished. so if we demolished for bedrooms we need to replace four bedroom units. that would be in that example, let's say you only have a need for 24 bedroom units pursuant
to what is in the public housing right now at alice griffith, then he would only build two of those public housing replacement units. does that- >> yes. right now a family has five bedrooms and then you are assessing the need of this family that has five bedrooms and a are now down to three or four. so you are saying you convert the five bedrooms two- >> public housing replacement unit would be for the upcoming nokia five bedrooms and it be something appropriate to the current household size. >> so what happens to the other within the five bedrooms now down to two bedrooms? you have to build another three, one bedrooms? as a replacement week >> we would have to build five bedrooms somewhere else and i would be a tax credit unit we would build in cases five or
six of alice or what we are also doing is putting some of those cra placement units to the projects in candlestick. >> so not necessarily at the alice griffith b was that is right. it can be any of the areas where ocii has jurisdiction but that would be it could be transbay can it be missionary or to be the shipyard. >> okay. >> thank you, jacket just to recap us do things we are ensuring that all the existing households that house griffith will get house so the bedroom size of the needs their needs and on top of that were going ahead and ensuring that the exact unit mix is going to be also built through ocii funded projects. so both needs are being met. people are there today will get their needs met in house now at alice griffith on top of that we are ensuring the unit sizes that were originally built a unit of alice griffith back in the day of being replicated in either out house griffith or to the
extent they don't need that because of the household size we will incorporate them in her portfolio going for. >> at the current residents understand this week >> of the current residents are having there-again sometimes these terms are used interchangeably but relocation. and replacement units. so alice griffith residents are being relocated into a new alice griffith units that is size to their household. separately in your package you have a replacement housing plan which has to do with just a physical replacement of unit sizes may be at alice griffith or maybe elsewhere but isn't tied to the people living in those units today. they are being taken care of through the relocation plans the housing authority and the funding you heard about earlier. so the people are being-their needs are being met so the exact unit size when removing and then we are also placing the unit mix in our portfolio in general. so it sort of were meeting to needs
to alice griffith and other projects. is that clear? >> that make sense, thank you for that. okay. let's see. i think i may have one more question. we are close public comment but it looks like-can we open it up? >> is your discretion to do so but you are right public testimony is close. >> so we can open it. but me if there's any more questions. i think those are the questions i had. so we are going to open public comment. state your name. we thank you so much my name is [inaudible] i just want to open up to that question that
you say, yes but like i said i'm on for bedrooms but on educating a lot of people because sometimes your household changes so what we want to do-i'm very involved in the community a lot and educate a lot of the residents. sometimes i don't need a four bedroom. down the line the kids move on and all that stuff right now, i'm for bedrooms. i've six children. my parents live with me. i feel like i should be in a five bedroom. so the more you are in a five bedroom of course your rent is going to go higher. that's why i like this what we're doing right now. to educate them. sometimes you don't need-that's why things happen. you don't need a four bedroom. some people they live in five bedrooms and it's only three or two. i don't judge but i educate a lot of residents
because the higher your bedroom the more money you pay the electricity and all that stuff. so that's why i believe they are not down [inaudible] with a educate them, do you really need this? we don't do anything behind doors. i'm very educated to the community. because we are people. we want to do the project so they can understand. so they can come to the community of a lot of things happen is you don't live there. i am very involved in the community, educates residents not even talk to them in the level they were at. that's why i bring it up because we work together with [inaudible] writer and i ask questions i think for you bringing that question because
anything could happen. anybody i want that bedroom but i only talked the residents. it's a four bedroom is ready go for it. we been waiting for these years and years and years. i am excited. i'm excited. that's why i'm involved so let him know, he yesterday is gone. it doesn't matter whose names but you've got to represent who you are to the community and i love where i'm at and i think you guys for listening to what i say and god bless you guys. >> thank you. one more comment. >> again my name is terry andrews of anderson and his foundation and him and speak again to the availability of people or renting and when you tear down these units they come back being renters but you've already demonstrated in west point carried down units allow people to purchase units. renters should be able to be given the lease with the option
to buy. renters, when will they be able to have participation of ownership unless they are given the opportunity to do with some creativity on financing? if you tear down. and they come back as units menu tear down other people's units than they are able to purchase units renters have been left out and people throughout our city are coming to this particular area of this potato district for home purchases. throughout the city. so people who live in these units they should be given the option with the lease to buy in these units. that has been dealt with and at no time. since we are consulate building objects in public housing, these people living renters all their lives one generation after another should be given the opportunity or purchase.
why should everybody else but the city, peer who want this for years and now they are up there and the poor folks they still are winners. what is wrong with this picture? it does not at all. >> thank you. are there any other questions? fellow commissioners? okay. >> it's very difficult. the woman is saying she has six children and 2 pounds. how much money do you need to afford 14+ in the rent. it just a comments. not a question. >> i do have one more question. it was raised earlier about community benefits. whether a community benefits that an implanted with this project or is it more like the whole? i know we approved the
committee benefit package the last meeting. >> well, the alice griffith project is part of larger hunters point shipyard phase 2 in candlestick point project and certainly we think the key community benefit bringing her abydos vitalist alice griffith developed this neighborhood but in and of itself there are a variety of services and things coming along the choice neighborhood grants but that's really revolves around this project in general. i don't know of anything else-i'm not sure there's anything else that would be an extra. again this is one part of the larger project which is as you mentioned in reference there's a larger community benefits plan by the master developer but this project before you today is just the alice griffith phase for itself and it's just following that project approval path. >> the alice griffith they're all rentals?
>> yes. because the public housing units are rental units and the new tax credit units are also rental units which is consistent with a financing mechanism that we have with low income housing tax credit. the units are required to be rental. >> okay. thank you. okay. we have a motion to move. a motion to move was made by commissioner bustos second bite commissioner pimentel. madame sec. please call roll call >> commissioner pimentel aye bustos aye singh aye mondejar 20 good commissioner rosales is absent the boat is for aye and one absent. >> call the next item >> item over six of the common on non-agenda items. madame vice chair >> we have any speaker cards for this item? >> yes. i have one. oscar
james. >> good afternoon again. oscar james. i do know how many of you saturday attended the lack cuisine in bayview-hunters point but it was a marvelous turnout. we have a lot of people from the community and from the city that participated . i was in the vip portion of the black cuisine and all of our food went and everyone loved it and liked it but i just hope they made a lot of money for the black cuisine. one of the main things i got up for is when we-when i first
[inaudible] and we were relocated out of joint housing up the hill we got $4500 for relocation with a certificate of preference. one of things we started with joint housing. i don't know if alice griffith can do that work know, but it should be away possible for them to do get some type of assistance for down payment assistance to buy those homes out of alice griffith. a lot of those people live in those projects all their lives. they pay rent. the old projects we are paying $50 something $59. but from 1944 until the 1968 when they took over those houses, we, as a young people at that time talked with justin herman and the hon. [inaudible] and cut at $4500 and
[inaudible] the navy also put some of that money together. we encourage a lot of people at that particular time to buy homes i was one of them who bought a home back then and what my home cost the den and what it would cost you know i would not be able to afford living there. but those peoples were living in the projects when i was living in the projects in the 40s and what have you. they pay for those units. it's one thing to keep going from paying rent, paying rent, paying rent to not have an opportunity to buy and stay in your community that's what we really need out in bayview-hunters point. for all of our renters both in potrero hill, artie street projects, all of them should be able to purchase and own homes. so maybe some kind of way you can you guys can look into that and make it come to be a reality. that's all i have to say. thank you very much. >> thank you mr. james.
>> i like this commission. >> thank you. do we have any more speaker cards >> no other cards >> let's call the next item i will close the public comment is closed. all the next item >> next-door a business item 7 report of the chair. madame vice chair. >> so the vice chair doesn't have a report. >> next-door to businesses item 8 report of the interim executive director mme. interim director. >> okay. next item please >> next order of business is item 9 commissioners questions and matters. madame vice chair >> commissioners, do you have any questions or comments? >> good job. [laughing] >> thank you commissioner singh. okay