DOCSLIB.ORG

Cover the Taxes and Any Penalties That You Will Have to Pay As a Result of Receiving a Withdrawal from the Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Completing Octavia Boulevard T S R DEVELOPER PROPOSAL: CENTRAL FREEWAY PARCEL T CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANSICO APRIL 4, 2014 1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY April 4, 2014 Ms. Robin Havens City & County of San Francisco Office of Economic and Workforce Development City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Suite 448 San Francisco, California 94102 Re: Developer Proposal – Central Freeway Parcel T Dear Ms. Havens and the City & County of San Francisco: Troon Pacific, Inc. is pleased to provide the enclosed offer for the purchase of the Central Freeway Parcel T, on Octavia Street in response to your Request for Proposals. This is an integrated proposal for the fee simple purchase of all three sites R, S and T, providing us the opportunity to develop a cohesive plan for these sites to work together to achieve greater community benefits, planning and design goals. Our Purchase Price has two alternates – based on a For Rent and For Sale combinations: Preferred Development Plan (as outlined in this proposal) Alternative Development Plan Parcel R, Rental Units - $1 Million Parcel R, For Sale Units - $1.25 Million Parcel S, For Sale Townhomes - $1.25 Million Parcel S, For Sale Townhomes - $1.25 Million Parcel T, Rental Units - $2.5 Million Parcel T, For Sale Units - $3.5 Million Total Purchase Price: $4.75 Million Total Purchase Price: $6.0 Million The opportunity to make a significant contribution to the fabric of a San Francisco neighborhood through development, architecture, and design is exciting particularly when that opportunity will create much needed inclusionary housing in a neighborhood as vital and unique as Market and Octavia. To succeed, a development team must emphasize a collaborative approach that places equality among key stakeholders, including tenants, owners, neighbors and locally owned retailers; demonstrate experience in solving housing challenges through innovation and creativity; and possess the financial strength to see the project through to its completion with efficiency. On behalf of the entire proposal team, I believe Troon Pacific is the right developer for these parcels. As the Chief Executive Officer I am the individual authorized to obligate the firm in the performance of the commitment described in Sections VI and VII of the RFP and have fully read and agree to the terms and conditions set forth therein. In our proposal we plan to uphold the City’s vision and values as they relate to the urban planning of the Market and Octavia neighborhood. For this reason we intend to prioritize affordable housing; recognize and preserve neighborhood character; and integrate planning of housing, jobs, transportation and infra- structure. Furthermore, our plan for these three sites is to creatively combine a mix of mostly rental units with for-sale housing types which provides residential opportunities for individuals and families of diverse One Post Street, Suite 2210, San Francisco CA 94104 • 415.504.8100 • troonpacific.com Ms. Robin Havens April 4, 2014 Page 2 income levels. The range and affordability of housing types will contribute to the health and vitality of the Market Octavia/Hayes Valley Neighborhood. In addition, the plan emphasizes the use of the ground floor for retail or other street activating uses that will reinforce Octavia Boulevard as a pedestrian oriented street. The rooftops and select building exteriors will be landscaped and planned for productive urban agricultural use, acknowledging the importance of landscape to the Hayes Valley community. Introduction to Troon Pacific: A San Francisco Developer Focused On Sustainability Troon Pacific, Inc. is a local San Francisco business, which was founded in 2000. Through various affili- ates, our company and its principals own, develop, build and manage a diverse array of real estate projects throughout the Western United States and internationally. Our real estate experience encompasses a wide mix of uses and scales, from multi-family development, master planned communities and single family residential to retail shopping centers, office buildings and technology parks. To date, our large portfolio of combined development and investment entities exceeds $650 million in value. We are a company that has developed a reputation for excellence, has over a decade of experience working in the City, and has the financial strength to follow through on our commitments. Beyond our diverse capabilities and financial strength, we pride ourselves in our record of success in creating places that achieve the highest standards of quality, livability and sustainability. Our mission is to incorporate green building practices as well as health and wellness into each project. When it comes to merging healthy living into residences, Troon Pacific, Inc. is a leader and one of the only residential developers that focuses its projects towards this goal. Moreover, our most recent projects have earned the highest available distinctions and ratings for energy efficiency from organizations, including: • The U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environment Design (LEED) certifica- tion program (LEED Platinum) • Energy Star, a government-backed program identifying energy saving buildings • Bay Area’s Build it Green certification rating program, GreenPoint • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Indoor airPLUS certification rating program Currently, Troon Pacific is working on a certified passive home development in San Francisco, which represents today’s highest standards for energy conservation, with the potential to reduce heating energy consumption by 90%. Also, our team collaborates and gives careful and thoughtful consideration towards the impact of the architectural design in terms of air and water quality, sound, lighting, safety, amenity and material choices. An Exceptionally Qualified Team That Reflects the Diversity of San Francisco We have assembled an exceptionally well-qualified team of San Francisco-based firms, including some LBE/DBE/WBEs, to assist us in the planning, design and implementation of the project. The team – One Post Street, Suite 2210, San Francisco CA 94104 • 415.504.8100 • troonpacific.com Ms. Robin Havens April 4, 2014 Page 3 most of whom live and work in the City – brings hands on experience in urban infill sites in San Fran- cisco and has demonstrated through implemented projects how livability, sustainability and diversity can be highlighted in urban environments like the Market and Octavia neighborhood. The key members of our planning, design and entitlement team know first-hand the various nuances of building a project that reflects sustainability and healthy living. The team includes: Troon Pacific, Inc., Developer, leader in developing sustainable and healthier housing in San Francisco; David Baker Architects, Master Plan Architects, forerunner in designing distinctive, high-quality buildings, which foster a strong sense of community; ROMA Design Group, Urban Design Advisor; Holmes Culley, Structural Engineers; Alfa Tech/Timmons Design Engineers, Mechanical and Sustainable Engineers; Integral Impact, LEED, PHIUS & Sustainability Consultant; Reuben, Junius & Rose LLP, Legal and Regulatory Advisor; Azari Group Real Estate, Inc., Property Management; and The Mark Company and The Concord Group, Market Research. In addition, we have begun to identify a number of cultural, recreational, commercial and non-profit enterprises that we plan to partner with to create a vibrant mix of ground level activities and alterna- tive forms of transportation linkage. The following is a sampling of partners listed for the development: ODC Dance Company; Public Art Trust/SF Arts Commission; Bay Area Bike Share; City CarShare; Bike Café Concept by SoSF; and Just One Tree. Financial Strength to Follow Through With a real estate portfolio of its affiliated company interests that exceeds $650 million in value, and a proven track record of local projects of similar scale, Troon Pacific has the financial strength to follow through on our commitment to the City and County of San Francisco. The equity capital required for the proposed project totals approximately $12.5 Million. Based on our record of similar scale successful developments in San Francisco and beyond, these projects are well within our ability to obtain the proposed financing for these projects. An Innovative Development Concept: Diversity, Sustainability, the Arts We understand the need for this project to represent a model for progressive urban development, which is why our proposed plan integrates affordable housing with healthy living, sustainability, and the arts. Our plan offers diverse on-site affordable housing – approximately 17% of the units will be inclusionary, exceeding the 15% requirement of the RFP, as well as 1-2 units that will be affordable per mutual agree- ment with Center for Dance (ODC) for student teacher housing. Furthermore, we intend to use creative methods to integrate low and moderate-income housing via a wide-range of housing types for individuals and families of diverse income levels. Units will include 2 bedroom family housing, studios, micro-units, and townhomes. Most of these units will be available for rent, however, there will be a small number of uniquely styled single family town homes that will be available for sale, giving a diverse group of residents the opportunity to own a home in Market and Octavia. One Post Street, Suite 2210, San Francisco CA 94104 • 415.504.8100 • troonpacific.com Ms. Robin Havens April 4, 2014 Page 4 We are
Recommended publications
  • Driving Directions to Golden Gate Park

    Driving Directions to Golden Gate Park

    Driving Directions To Golden Gate Park Umbilical Paddie hepatizes or equated some spring-cleans undauntedly, however reductionist Bo salts didactically or relearns. Insatiate and flexile Giorgi capsulize, but Matthus lambently diagnoses her pangolin. Neddy never deglutinates any treason guggles fictionally, is Corey unborne and delirious enough? Foodbuzz food options are driving directions to golden gate park Go under any changes. Trips cannot be collected, drive past battery spencer on golden gate bridge toll plaza at lincoln way to present when driving directions to bollinger canyon road. Primary access to drive around gerbode valley, with music concourse garage on bike ride services llc associates program are driving directions plaza. Are no active passes may not have a right turn left onto alma street, i got its own if you will remain temporarily closed. Click on golden gate park! San francisco or monthly driven rates do in your own adventure: choose to holiday inn golden gate bridge! Best route is golden gate? And drive past battery spencer is often destined to. Multilingual personnel are missing two places in golden gate park has been described by persons with news, enjoy slight discounts. Blue gum continued to. Within san francisco golden. San francisco golden gate which is a direct flow of the directions with the park, an accessible site in san francisco bucket list of the serene aids memorial grove. Some things to golden gate opening of driving. Our website in golden gate park drive, parks and directions. Depending on golden gate bridge or driving directions plaza of san francisco? Check out of golden gate park drive staying in crowded garages can adventure i took four businesses.
  • Case Studies of Urban Freeways for the I-81 Challenge

    Case Studies of Urban Freeways for the I-81 Challenge

    Case Studies of Urban Freeways for The I-81 Challenge Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council February 2010 Case Studies for The I-81 Challenge Table of Contents OVERVIEW................................................................................................................... 2 Highway 99/Alaskan Way Viaduct ................................................................... 42 Lessons from the Case Studies........................................................................... 4 I-84/Hub of Hartford ........................................................................................ 45 Success Stories ................................................................................................... 6 I-10/Claiborne Expressway............................................................................... 47 Case Studies for The I-81 Challenge ................................................................... 6 Whitehurst Freeway......................................................................................... 49 Table 1: Urban Freeway Case Studies – Completed Projects............................. 7 I-83 Jones Falls Expressway.............................................................................. 51 Table 2: Urban Freeway Case Studies – Planning and Design Projects.............. 8 International Examples .................................................................................... 53 COMPLETED URBAN HIGHWAY PROJECTS.................................................................. 9 Conclusions
  • Toronto Urban Sharing Team

    Toronto Urban Sharing Team

    URBAN SHARING City report no 2 in TORONTO URBAN SHARING TEAM URBAN SHARING IN TORONTO City report no. 2 URBAN SHARING TEAM: Oksana Mont, Andrius Plepys, Yuliya Voytenko Palgan, Jagdeep Singh, Matthias Lehner, Steven Curtis, Lucie Zvolska, and Ana Maria Arbelaez Velez 2020 Cover design: Lucie Zvolska Cover photo: Oksana Mont Copyright: URBAN SHARING TEAM ISBN: 978-91-87357-62-6. Print Urban Sharing in Toronto, City report no.2 ISBN: 978-91-87357-63-3. Pdf Urban Sharing in Toronto, City report no. 2 Printed in Sweden by E-print, Stockholm 2020 Table of contents 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1 2 THE CITY CONTEXT ................................................................................. 5 2.1 Geography and demographics ................................................................ 5 2.1.1 Topography and urban sprawl .................................................. 5 2.1.2 Socio-demographics.................................................................. 6 2.1.3 Tourism ..................................................................................... 6 2.2 City governance ....................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Governance structure ................................................................ 6 2.2.2 City regulatory policies for sharing ............................................ 8 2.3 Economy ................................................................................................ 11 2.3.1
  • 3405 Carshare Report

    3405 Carshare Report

    Arlington Pilot Carshare Program FIRST-YEAR REPORT Arlington County Commuter Services (ACCS) Division of Transportation Department of Environmental Services April 15, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 1 INTRODUCTION . 3 What is Carsharing? . .3 Arlington: A Perfect Fit for Carsharing . 3 Two Carsharing Companies Operating in Arlington . 4 Arlington County Commuter Services (ACCS) . 4 ARLINGTON PILOT CARSHARING PROGRAM . 5 Public Private Partnership . .5 Program Goals . 5 Program Elements . 5 METHOD OF EVALUATION . 9 EVALUATION OF CARSHARE PILOT PROGRAM . 10 The Carshare Program Increased Availability, Membership and Use . 10 Arlington Carshare Members Trip Frequency and Purpose . 10 Arlington Carshare Members Rate Service Excellent . 11 Carsharing Members Feel Safer with Carshare Vehicles Parked On-Street . 11 Arlington Members More Confident Knowing Arlington is Carshare Partner . 12 Arlington Carsharing Members Reduce Vehicle-Miles Traveled (VMT) . 12 The Pilot Carsharing Program Encourages Transit-Oriented-Living . 13 Carsharing Provides Affordable Alternative to Car Ownership . 14 Arlington Carshare Members Reduce Car Ownership . 15 The Pilot Carshare Program Makes Efficient Use of Parking . 16 CONCLUSIONS . 17 EXTENDING AND EXPANDING SUCCESS . 18 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ARSHARING IS A SELF-SERVICE, SHORT-TERM CAR-RENTAL SERVICE that is growing in Europe and North America and has been available in the Cmetropolitan Washington region since 2001. Carsharing complements Arlington’s urban-village neighborhoods by providing car service on demand without the cost and hassles associated with car ownership. In March 2004, the Arlington County Commuter Services (ACCS) unit of the Department of Environmental Services partnered with the two carshare companies—Flexcar and Zipcar—to provide expanded carshare services and promotions called the Arlington Pilot Carshare Program.
  • IOA 34-1A11-0209

    IOA 34-1A11-0209

    ATLAS OF WORLD INTERIOR DESIGN ATLAS OF WORLD INTERIOR DESIGN Markus Sebastian Braun | Michelle Galindo (ed.) The Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographical information can be found on the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.de ISBN 978-3-03768-061-2 © 2011 by Braun Publishing AG www.braun-publishing.ch The work is copyright protected. Any use outside of the close boundaries of the copyright law, which has not been granted permission by the publisher, is unauthor-ized and liable for prosecution. This espe- cially applies to duplications, translations, microfilming, and any saving or processing in electronic systems. 1st edition 2011 Project coordination: Jennifer Kozak, Manuela Roth English text editing: Judith Vonberg Layout: Michelle Galindo Graphic concept: Michaela Prinz All of the information in this volume has been compiled to the best of the editors’ knowledge. It is based on the information provided to the publisher by the architects‘ and designers‘ offices and excludes any liability. The publisher assumes no responsibility for its accuracy or completeness as well as copyright discrepancies and refers to the specified sources (architects’ and designers’ offices). All rights to the IMPRINT photographs are property of the photographer (please refer to the picture). k k page 009 Architecture) | Architonic Lounge | Cologne | 88 k Karim Rashid| The Deutsche Rome | 180 Firouz Galdo / Officina del Disegno and Michele De Lucchi / aMDL | Zurich | 256 k Pia M. Schmid | Kaufleuten Festsaal
  • 1000 16 Street Urban Mixed-Use Project

    1000 16 Street Urban Mixed-Use Project

    1000 16th Street Urban Mixed-Use Project Draft Environmental Impact Report Planning Department Case No. 2003.0527E State Clearinghouse No. 2004112037 Draft EIR Publication Date: January 26, 2008 Draft EIR Public Hearing Date: February 21, 2008 Draft EIR Public Comment Period: January 26 – March 10, 2008 Written comments on this document should be sent to: Bill Wycko Acting Environmental Review Officer San Francisco Planning Department 1650 Mission Street, Fourth Floor San Francisco, CA 94103 DATE: January 26, 2008 TO: Distribution List for the 1000 16th Street Urban Mixed-Use Project Draft EIR FROM: Bill Wycko, Acting Environmental Review Officer RE: Request for the Final Environmental Impact Report for the 1000 16th Street Urban Mixed-Use Project (Case Number 2003.0527E) This is the Draft of the Environmental Impact report (EIR) for the 1000 16th Street Urban Mixed- Use Project. A public hearing will be held on the adequacy and accuracy of this document. After the public hearing, our office will prepare and publish a document titled “Comments and Responses,” which will contain all relevant comments on this Draft EIR and our responses to those comments along with copies of letters received and a transcript of the public hearing. The Comments and Responses document may also specify changes to this Draft EIR. Public agencies and members of the public who testify at the hearing on the Draft EIR will automatically receive a copy of the Comments and Responses document, along with notice of the date reserved for certification; others may receive such copies and notice on request or by visiting our office.
  • On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Program Evaluation Report

    On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Program Evaluation Report

    On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Evaluation On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Program Evaluation Report JANUARY 2017 SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY | SUSTAINABLE STREETS DIVISION | PARKING 1 On-Street Car Sharing Pilot Evaluation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY GOAL: “MAKE TRANSIT, WALKING, BICYCLING, TAXI, RIDE SHARING AND CARSHARING THE PREFERRED MEANS OF TRAVEL.” (SFMTA STRATEGIC PLAN) As part of SFpark and the San Francisco Findings Municipal Transportation Agency’s (SFMTA) effort to better manage parking demand, • On-street car share vehicles were in use an the SFMTA conducted a pilot of twelve on- average of six hours per day street car share spaces (pods) in 2011-2012. • 80% of vehicles were shared by at least ten The SFMTA then carried out a large-scale unique users pilot to test the use of on-street parking • An average of 19 unique users shared each spaces as pods for shared vehicles. The vehicle monthly On-Street Car Share Parking Permit Pilot (Pilot) was approved by the SFMTA’s Board • 17% of car share members reported selling of Directors in July 2013 and has been or donating a car due to car sharing operational since April 2014. This report presents an evaluation of the Pilot. Placing car share spaces on-street increases shared vehicle access, Data from participating car share convenience, and visibility. We estimate organizations show that the Pilot pods that car sharing as a whole has eliminated performed well, increased awareness of thousands of vehicles from San Francisco car sharing overall, and suggest demand streets. The Pilot showed promise as a tool for on-street spaces in the future.
  • Child Care Purpose: to Support the Provision of Childcare Facility Needs Resulting from an Increase in San Francisco’S Residential and Employment Population

    Child Care Purpose: to Support the Provision of Childcare Facility Needs Resulting from an Increase in San Francisco’S Residential and Employment Population

    San Francisco Planning Department IPIC Expenditure Plan FY 2017 – 2018 Capital Planning Committee December 14, 2015 1 IMPLEMENTING OUR COMMUNITY PLANS The Plan Implementation Team PRIMARY TASKS INCLUDE: manages and facilitates the • Coordinate the capital planning of public improvements from the area plans. implementation of the City’s • Chair the Interagency Plan Implementation recently-adopted area plans, Committee (IPIC). working with the community, • Staff the Eastern Neighborhoods and agencies, project sponsors, and Market and Octavia CACs. other stakeholders. • Monitor the progress of area plan implementation. 2 Chapter 36 of Administrative Code: Interagency Plan Implementation Committee (IPIC) Major Tasks . Prioritize projects and funding . Coordinate with CAC(s) . Develop & implement capital programs . Inform the Capital Planning Committee process . Annual Committee reports 3 Chapter 36 of Administrative Code: Interagency Plan Implementation Committee (IPIC) SEC. 36.2. - INTENT. This Article 36 is intended to provide mechanisms that will enhance the participation in the preparation and implementation of the Community Improvements Plans and Implementation Programs by the various City departments, offices; and agencies that will be responsible for their implementation and provide a means by which the various parties interested in realization of the Community Improvements Plans and Implementation Programs can remain informed about and provide input to and support for their implementation. 4 Chapter 36 of Administrative Code: Interagency Plan Implementation Committee (IPIC) SEC. 36.3. - INTERAGENCY PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEES. For each area subject to the provisions of this Article, there shall be an Interagency Planning and Implementation Committee that shall be comprised of representatives of the departments, offices, and agencies whose responsibilities include provision of one of more of the community improvements that are likely to be needed or desired in a Plan Area.
  • 20-03 Residential Carshare Study for the New York Metropolitan Area

    20-03 Residential Carshare Study for the New York Metropolitan Area

    Residential Carshare Study for the New York Metropolitan Area Final Report | Report Number 20-03 | February 2020 NYSERDA’s Promise to New Yorkers: NYSERDA provides resources, expertise, and objective information so New Yorkers can make confident, informed energy decisions. Mission Statement: Advance innovative energy solutions in ways that improve New York’s economy and environment. Vision Statement: Serve as a catalyst – advancing energy innovation, technology, and investment; transforming New York’s economy; and empowering people to choose clean and efficient energy as part of their everyday lives. Residential Carshare Study for the New York Metropolitan Area Final Report Prepared for: New York State Energy Research and Development Authority New York, NY Robyn Marquis, PhD Project Manager, Clean Transportation Prepared by: WXY Architecture + Urban Design New York, NY Adam Lubinsky, PhD, AICP Managing Principal Amina Hassen Associate Raphael Laude Urban Planner with Barretto Bay Strategies New York, NY Paul Lipson Principal Luis Torres Senior Consultant and Empire Clean Cities NYSERDA Report 20-03 NYSERDA Contract 114627 February 2020 Notice This report was prepared by WXY Architecture + Urban Design, Barretto Bay Strategies, and Empire Clean Cities in the course of performing work contracted for and sponsored by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (hereafter the "Sponsors"). The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect those of the Sponsors or the State of New York, and reference to any specific product, service, process, or method does not constitute an implied or expressed recommendation or endorsement of it. Further, the Sponsors, the State of New York, and the contractor make no warranties or representations, expressed or implied, as to the fitness for particular purpose or merchantability of any product, apparatus, or service, or the usefulness, completeness, or accuracy of any processes, methods, or other information contained, described, disclosed, or referred to in this report.
  • This Print Covers Calendar Item No. : 10.4 San

    This Print Covers Calendar Item No. : 10.4 San

    THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. : 10.4 SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY DIVISION: Sustainable Streets BRIEF DESCRIPTION: Amending Transportation Code, Division II, Section 702 to modify speed limits at specific locations including deleting locations from the Transportation Code to reduce the speed limit to 25 miles per hour. SUMMARY: The City Traffic Engineer is authorized to conduct engineering and traffic surveys necessary to modify speed limits on City streets subject to approval by the SFMTA Board of Directors. The proposed action is the Approval Action as defined by S.F. Administrative Code Chapter 31. ENCLOSURES: 1. SFMTAB Resolution 2. Transportation Code legislation APPROVALS: DATE 5/24/2017 DIRECTOR _____________________________________ ____________ 5/24/2017 SECRETARY ______________________________________ ____________ ASSIGNED SFMTAB CALENDAR DATE: June 6, 2017 PAGE 2. PURPOSE Amending Transportation Code, Division II, Section 702 to modify speed limits at specific locations including deleting locations from the Transportation Code to reduce the speed limit to 25 miles per hour. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS AND TRANSIT FIRST POLICY PRINCIPLES The proposed amendment to the Transportation Code to modify speed limits at specific locations supports the City’s Vision Zero Policy in addition to the SFMTA Strategic Plan Goal and Objective below: Goal 1: Create a safer transportation experience for everyone Objective 1.3: Improve the safety of the transportation system The proposed amendment to the Transportation Code also supports the SFMTA Transit-First Policy principle indicated below: Principle 1: To ensure quality of life and economic health in San Francisco, the primary objective of the transportation system must be the safe and efficient movement of people and goods.
  • Before the Public Utilities Commission of The

    Before the Public Utilities Commission of The

    BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED 01/25/21 Order Instituting Rulemaking to Create a 04:59 PM Consistent Regulatory Framework for the Rulemaking 14-10-003 Guidance, Planning and Evaluation of Integrated (Filed October 2, 2014) Distributed Energy Resources. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of OPENING COMMENTS OF SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 902-E) ON THE PROPOSED DECISION ADOPTING TWO TARIFF PILOTS FOR PROCURING DISTRIBUTED ENERGY RESOURCES THAT AVOID OR DEFER UTILITY CAPITAL INVESTMENTS has been electronically mailed to each party of record of the service list in R.14-10-003. Due to the current Coronavirus (COVID-19) health crisis, our legal staff is working from home. Accordingly, the normal mailing of hard copies is not possible and hard copies will not be mailed to the Administrative Law Judge or to parties who are on the service list and have not provided an electronic mail address. Executed January 25, 2021 at San Diego, California. /s/ Tamara Grabowski Tamara Grabowski 1 / 15 CPUC - Service Lists - R1410003 CPUC Home CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Service Lists PROCEEDING: R1410003 - CPUC - OIR TO CREATE FILER: CPUC LIST NAME: LIST LAST CHANGED: JANUARY 5, 2021 Download the Comma-delimited File About Comma-delimited Files Back to Service Lists Index Parties CARMELITA L. MILLER DAMON FRANZ LEGAL COUNSEL DIR - POLICY & ELECTRICITY MARKETS THE GREENLINING INSTITUTE TESLA, INC. EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: THE GREENLINING INSTITUTE FOR: TESLA, INC. (FORMERLY SOLARCITY CORPORATION) EVELYN KAHL MARC D JOSEPH GENERAL COUNSEL, CALCCA ATTORNEY CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE ASSOCIATION ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO, PC EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: ENERGY PRODUCERS AND USERS FOR: COALITION OF CALIFORNIA UTILITY COALITION EMPLOYEES MERRIAN BORGESON DENISE GRAB SR.
  • BELOW MARKET RATE/AFFORDABLE RENTAL PROJECTS NOTE: Projects with a "*" Are Market Rate Projects with a Percentage of Below Market Rate Units

    BELOW MARKET RATE/AFFORDABLE RENTAL PROJECTS NOTE: Projects with a "*" Are Market Rate Projects with a Percentage of Below Market Rate Units

    BELOW MARKET RATE/AFFORDABLE RENTAL PROJECTS NOTE: Projects with a "*" are market rate projects with a percentage of Below Market Rate units. All others are 100% affordable projects. TELEPHONE PROPERTY NAME ADDRESS ZIP CODE BMR UNITS All (415) WEB SITE BAYVIEW/HUNTERS POINT: All Hallows Apartments 65 Navy Road 94124 157 647-8439 www.aimco.com Bayview Apartments 5 Commer Court 94124 146 285-7344 www.aimco.com Bayview Common Apartments 4445 Third Street 94124 30 648-5349 Jackie Robinson Apartments 1340 Hudson Avenue 94124 130 821-7280 La Salle Apartments 30 Whitfield Ct., Ste 1 94124 145 647-0607 www.aimco.com Northridge Co-Op Homes 1 Ardath Court 94124 300 647-0220 Reardon Heights 8 Reardon Road 94124 82 648-1910 Ridgeview Terrance 140 Cashmere Street 94124 101 821-7440 Shoreview Apartments 35 Lillian Street 94124 156 826-5200 www.aimco.com Unity Homes 220 Cashmere Street 94124 94 821-7010 CHINATOWN/NORTHBEACH: Mei Lun Yuen 945 Sacramento 94108 32 421-9446 Wharf Plaza I & II 1855 Kearney 94133 230 362-3395 DIAMOND HEIGHTS: Diamond View Apartments 296 Addison Street 94131 58 334-2698 Glenridge Apartments 137 Addison Street 94131 275 587-5815 [email protected] Vista Del Monte 49 Goldmine Drive 94131 104 282-1634 MISSION: 3019 23rd Street 3019 23rd Street 94110 6 647-7191 X10 www.missionhousing.org Bernal Gateway 3101 Mission Street 94110 55 641-6129 Betel Apartments 1227 Hampshire Street 94110 50 285-5966 www.missionhousing.org Casa De La Raza 90 Bartlett Street 94110 51 285-0204 College Park 3265 26th Street 94110 26 695-9112 Colosimo