Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transbay Block1 ENA topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission authorizes exclusive negotiations with Tishman Speyer for Transbay Block 1 amid parking and HOA debate
Summary
The Commission approved an exclusive negotiation agreement (ENA) with Block 1 Propertyholder LP (Tishman Speyer) to negotiate a disposition and development agreement for Transbay Block 1, advancing proposals for 76 OCII‑subsidized affordable units and alternative 300‑ or 400‑foot schemes. Commissioners debated parking parity and HOA structure; staff estimated a $4 million cost difference for full parking parity.
The Commission on Community Investment and Infrastructure on Nov. 18 voted to authorize an exclusive negotiation agreement (ENA) with Block 1 Propertyholder LP, an affiliate of Tishman Speyer, to negotiate a disposition and development agreement for a residential project on Transbay Block 1.
OCII staff said the site is comprised of multiple legal parcels and that the former redevelopment agency purchased one parcel for affordable housing purposes. Staff presented two development alternatives from Tishman Speyer: a 300‑foot tower and a 400‑foot tower. Under the 300‑foot option the proposed program includes approximately 318 units total (including 76 OCII‑subsidized limited‑equity affordable units priced in the 80–100% AMI band as described by staff, roughly estimated at $212,000–$290,000 for an average two‑bedroom if sold at current levels), plus developer‑subsidized affordable units in podium/townhouse portions. The 400‑foot alternative would increase total units to about 399 and raise the OCII parcel fair market value.
Carl Shannon of Tishman Speyer and Studio Gang Architects described design massing and how a taller scheme could increase the number of below‑market units. Staff summarized ENA financial terms: OCII would receive fair market value for the OCII parcel—$14,700,000 for the 300‑foot option or $19,200,000 for the 400‑foot option—and a $500,000 ENA deposit to cover staff and legal costs. OCII would provide a subsidy for its 76 units of up to $275,000 per unit, up to a $21,000,000 maximum, and sell those units through OCII’s limited‑equity program to keep them permanently affordable.
Parking and HOA structure emerged as the principal issues in commissioner discussion. Staff explained the OCII standalone affordable component is proposed at 0.25 parking spaces per unit (consistent with other OCII projects in transit‑oriented areas), while the Transbay inclusionary/developer‑subsidized units would default to parity with market‑rate parking under the Inclusionary Housing Program unless a waiver or alternative (for example transportation benefits) is negotiated. Commissioners pressed for on‑site affordable units to enjoy comparable amenities and asked whether separate HOAs for affordable and market‑rate units have precedent; staff and the developer pointed to prior projects with multiple HOAs and said they would work with the California Bureau of Real Estate to structure budgets to limit HOA dues for affordable owners. Staff also estimated that providing parity parking rather than a 0.25 ratio on the developer‑subsidized affordable units would amount to roughly a $4,000,000 delta in project cost on the scenarios discussed.
Commissioner Bustos moved to approve the ENA, with Commissioner Mondejar seconding; commissioners agreed that staff would study parking options during negotiations. The roll call recorded three ayes and one absent and the Commission approved the ENA.
