[laughter] is anyone here? ok. >> i do not think that they anticipated you getting so far along. [laughter] >> would you like to move on to item number 14? >> we can do that. >> member's consent? >> authorizing the executive director to execute a contract #six to 6.02 -- 626.02. >> questions from the board? director hannity? >> who are we asking, you? >> you can ask me. i will work hard.

>> $32 million to rebuild seven lrv's over six years. what does anyone cost? >> it depends on how many you are buying at the time. >> like a blue light discount? >> you got it. >> what about seven new ones at one time? >> over 5 million apiece. recently a contract was awarded in minneapolis for roughly 41 vehicles and some extra, coming out to just that, 4 million vehicles. it goes to your comparison, seven vehicles were needed for repair. three of them were getting repairs under this contract. staff was left with taking a look at the four remaining vehicles, trying to figure out if it would be worth a competitive approach, plus the

value that we owe the fda, as we did not advertise for a fully. staff came to the conclusion that there was no way we could put a contract out for such a small number of vehicles, changing of price and value. >> i am comforted to hear that this was all a lot of and does not surprise me, but i always had it in my head that seven of them would prepare for 32 million. but by that variable it would not matter if you use the lower 4 million, but the additional thing that concerns me is six years, up to six years that seven of our 107 are so vehicles could fall into disrepair, whereas if you purchase new ones -- i realize you don't just go

down to a lot to get them, but my question is, how long does it take them to get there? >> it could take that long and longer. the design and engineering, going through the competitive process. >> i can go to that question. the contracts is negotiated for seven vehicles. there are three that we think will take a short to medium term repairs. within the first 20 months we should see those vehicles returning. the remaining four vehicles are just piles of rubble. >> what is the age of those four vehicles we are talking about? >> 17 years. >> these cars were damaged early on when they first arrived in

have been sitting and cannibalized for parts. >> sorry to unravel, but it is $32 million. these vehicles, once repaired over the course of six years, will not be as good as would be a new vehicle. >> they will be pre-built to that standard, in better condition than the rest of the fleet. >> i do not doubt that, but listen, is there a comparative value? it is a huge and sophisticated thing and at the end of the day i will defer, but i want to make sure that we are asking the question, getting to the point that the chairman is surely thinking of. the question is, $32 million for seven cars rebuilds over six years, are you sure that we

would not be better off just taking the money? >> i do not think that we could buy more cars without money. in terms of time, costs, going through the process, what we would be looking at as a vehicle manufacturer, what we would be looking at is asking a major manufacturer to to lot to build seven cars. we are in a difficult situation where it comes to these vehicles. carter made a good point, some of them can be returned quickly, but the others are merely shells and over the years they have sat around without being utilized. we have the time line as related to the central subway in time

for 2018. at the same time we have the other rehabilitation program with a 8-10 cars these days, we are at the point with fleet management that asking these difficult questions of ourselves, i would think absolutely. >> correct me if i am wrong, but we are not rebuilding in kind. this is the opportunity to look at the next fleet of vehicles for the system. there is also that piece of this program, looking at the new design in terms of piloting

these for the future. >> correct. two of the vehicles, the main reason propulsion system of the parts are no longer available and that makes it difficult to restore something and put it back when you know that a product is no longer in line and being turned up. >> thank-you. i wanted to add, these seven cars have to be able to couple and a train line with an existing fleet. you could not do that with new cars at an economical pace. hall, as you know, i have always avoided the sole source contracts but i think that is the way to go in this case. fro>> remember, i am one of thee people, if push comes to shove,

i would rather purchase something new, you know? any time anyone tells me that we're going to davis for more money, i know when the cars are going to be weaker when they come back. given the economic climate, i did not realize that it took so long to get these vehicles. otherwise i would say spend the money to get new fixing it in the future if we do not. >> i think that a lot of these questions could have been answered on the analysis.

we had a statement saying that this is what it would have cost and how long it would have taken if we have had that information. >> good point in terms of board resolution, and more comparative analysis would have helped. these are questions that we ask ourselves as staff. >> i will move the item. >> second. >> for the discussion? are all of the people from the park here now? [laughter] would you like to try that all over again, mr. gi? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i apologize about the confusion

earlier. peter and i were sitting at our desk and we heard that you were calling our names, so we are here. we have a power point presentation today and i will briefly give you an overview of the park project generally, and then peter will speak briefly on the involvement of mta and significant transportation infrastructure projects, speaking at length about substantive components of the project, one of the largest projects approved located in the southwest corner of the city it would be incredible for san

francisco in the sense that very few housing units have been added in decades, this would add more than 2.5 times the existing number of units in addition to having significant retail space, making it a truly self sustaining community. the project sponsor has voluntarily put forward a groundbreaking sustainability program, the project sponsor getting going in more detail, allowing sentences good to add thousands of units with no new energy consumption while subic and the improving water quality and recreational facilities in one quarter of the city that has not seen new investment in years. we are calling this a public- private partnership.

unlike treasure island or candlestick, where the city is a partner in owning the land, here we have no such thing. we have a public right of way, but we are not the real estate developers. however, the city does play an important role, which is why we are before you today. and it is why we will be back before this body again. we do play an important role in terms of guiding this project through environmental review and public benefits that we will seek from the project sponsor where peter will prevent -- present detail on that. developing agreements are essentially a contract between the city and the private developer, expressing things on

normal entitlements that normally we cannot. in addition to the development agreement that is almost a small constitution for the planning and development of this area, there will be a general plan amendments related to the planning code that will create a special is zoned the district. those are the items that are ultimately moving through the planning commission. briefly, the acting project manager, we anticipate a speedy process that is rare in south

san francisco. we had substantial input closed on june 28, bar receiving first draft and second draft comments that have been completed, so we are on track is a city for october by the planning commission, looking at october 21 for the first hearing of the planning commission. following the approval of those items, the entire package should move to the board of supervisors and would require approval by the board of supervisors. coming back to approve the final package we hope to have the

entire package before the mayor in december. as i mentioned earlier, if you have any questions, this is the primary reason we wanted to negotiate the benefits that would not normally be able to be negotiated under conventional land use laws with security and flexibility in which we were able to offer the developer approval the loot -- that allows for large-scale infrastructure. the extension of the metro line into the bay project changes the roadway, significantly changing bicycle rage.

we agreed the new parks and small recreational facilities would happen over a series of decade and the developer is asking if they can spell out the project to see if it can be interrupted with what we get in return being a significant package of public benefits. finally, all of this has been managed to read memorandum of understanding. early on in the process, our office went around to each agency and found participation with an organizing documents that laid out how each agency would participate in reviewing the planned components. this is a large and complex project. each agency received reviewers and all documents, all relevant

documents, were circulated to the various sister agencies of the city for review and input. i can let peter going to review about on those components of the plan. this one also provides full reimbursement, so anytime that staff has spent on this, they will be fully reimbursed. finally, they have set up a joint project men and to some degree the planning department on land use issues has already begun negotiating the general outline of development that is the public benefits peace. we will of course becoming back before the planning commission and the board with a final draft version in the agreement. unless there are any questions,

i am done of my presentation and i would like to pass a non. peter? projects sponsor? thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is craig hartman. my colleague, leo, is also with me from s o m. we are excited to present this project to you. as michael pointed out, this project has been quite efficient in terms of e. i. are, we have had over 250 meetings with neighbors, residents in the community, who were extremely helpful through the agency has advocacy groups to arrive at the plan that you will see.

in front of you is, of course, a familiar form, sense is go neighborhoods, and in this case, as parker said, it is unique. in the lower left-hand corner you can see how you need it is, a single ownership property and as such there is an opportunity to achieve things in terms of transit use that is unparalleled. this project currently has 3221 at home and is very close to the arterioles. it is all the rage, close to important transit arteries, including the bus lines, working very near but not quite touching

parts of the city. currently it is a very car dependent place with the resources in the neighborhood, almost like a gated community. because we had this opportunity for single ownership we thought we could transform this neighborhood as a paradigm for what sustainable could be in the future. usable public open spaces, making it a net addition of 5679 individual dwelling units. plus significant neighborhood serving amenities. interestingly, in doing this we were able to achieve a 60% reduction for home using energy,

potable water, and production of wastewater. likewise the use of the automobile based on current technology. we are producing more rental units in the project for a current total of 89 when complete. importantly, we will be introducing these neighborhood amenities, which will allow us to begin to use pedestrian movement and reduce reliance

upon the automobile. here is a plan to view of the project, the boulevard being on the left, with 19th avenue above. the plan is to introduce a retail corridor, day care center, a community center, and so forth, with a majority of the neighbors in a 400 block. with this will be a series of small core elements that will contain business centers for work at home, car sharing and bicycle available to residents for weekly use. a huge part of this is the introduction of green space systems that will link the

community and provide recreation for sports, including organic farms and containing plant materials, cleansing the water, introduced for the system, charging in dropping the lake level. it will also provide structured play areas for residents. right neighborhood is buying 88 committee and has limited access. you can probably see and know that this creates a congestion in the adjacent neighborhoods. the attention is to open the committee up and to begin to change the community and make this a more accessible place and

to make the streets those which are safe using the latest design ideas and pedestrian-friendly places. this is due to the stuff in helping us to develop these concepts. with us is increased access to the cars and also pedestrian safety. the cross streets working with your staff, we have developed these intersections which are more safe for the residence and a neighbor's and their connecting into the neighborhood itself. you can see with the improved walkways, we have worked with the bicycle coalition in extending dedicated by claims and connecting to the existing corridors.

this is an integrated system. we have worked with the community to work to bring the line directly into the side. this is to park merced and san francisco state university. this is in the middle of the avenue. this moves us into the stock that would provide greater access for the residents of the park and greater safety for all of the user's including san francisco state. this would create a very important linkage that is

missing in our transportation system in this side of the city. there are other advantages not only providing for stops that you can get off the new system but also the opportunities to create a landscaped front door to the city right here on 19th avenue. we also will be providing a zero to low emissions shuttle bus that will provide access from this unique and the bus stops that we are providing at the northern edge directly to the daily city parks station. this connects directly to the part. this is a very important

linkage. in the interim, we will be using the same shuttle best -- shuttle bus. as was mentioned, this is a long-term project which took approximately 20 years to complete but we know the estimates that we have given you are actually conservative ones. we see this as an opportunity to create a place that is truly unique. the neighborhood future is a rich and vibrant place in which to live. hal>> as i go through this presentation, there are two overriding ports which are important there are two projects

which are linked fairy closely together. one is the park merced project. the other was asking us to take a bigger look at what is happening in the southwestern part of san francisco. we are trying to get our hands on the bigger picture. the second point is in developing the networks for the projects, there were three planning efforts that gave us a leg up. this gave us the most current planning foundations for transit service. the trend francisco bicycle plant. he says helped -- these have helped. i would like to look at the next debt and particularly, the engagement.

the 19th avenue steady is a project that has been requested by the supervisor. i will go into the details. we work closely with the supervisor and the project sponsor between 2008 and 2009 to really get the study up and running to analyze this so that this reflects our best data. we have prepared a transportation impact study which is the for a draft and fermenta review is published. we also made sure that we agree to the right people to give the kind of technical overview the project needed. for instance, the operation, safety, and construction helped