indeed be popular and being treated as expedient fixes for parks, but we have all seen the historic cost of others as popular fads. for instance, the fiscally efficient and widely used lead- based paints poison for decades, and nothing was thought to be more fiscally efficient than filling buildings with asbestos. today's fiscal fix is to create public parks with toxic synthetic materials that which only time will write be true environmental impact reports. it is a public records that the san francisco parts commission and the city's management regularly utilize city employees from the san francisco department of the environment to help themselves and knowingly falsely claim that the product that they use does not contain lead or heavy metals. such dishonesty and political shenanigans will undoubtedly have consequences. city field and rbd clearly knows is false and misleading. the board of supervisors and park commission have been told -- and, no, it is not true. the question is if children are

going to develop sicknesses from these parts, including the golden gate park, but how many and how soon? it is currently on know how much exposure it will take before children that are in hailing the degrading material in these fields will begin exhibiting symptoms of accumulated lead poisoning, mercury poisoning, chronic asthma, acute mrsa bacterial infections, cancer, or other medical complications. we request that the row and valid environmental studies and procedures be conducted before materials are selected in the future and that the public be properly and fairly informed of any risks that their use made in detail. thank you. supervisor maxwell: welcome. any further public comment on this item? public comment is closed. colleagues, before us is items one, two, and 3. without objection? so moved. item four.

>> item four, ordinance authorizing the execution of an agreement with the museum of modern art for property at 676 howard st., fire station number 1, in exchange for 935 folsom st., a replacement fire station. supervisor maxwell: i just wanted to comment on the -- regarding our speaker's comments. we will be working on those issues. it is ongoing with iraq and parts and so on and so forth, and i think you are right -- it is ongoing with red and park -- rec and park. war right. there is no solid evidence of what you're suggesting, and that is why it continues. -- you are right. but we continue to monitor that. thank you very much. >> i'm from the office of economic and workforce development. we are here to request the committee's consideration of a conditional land disposition an

acquisition agreement between the city and san francisco museum of modern art, which will set the stage for the museum to build a new wing, and for the fire department to acquire a new state-of-the-art replacement for fire station number 1. city staff and representatives have spent the past several months working out what we think is a real win-win for the city and sfmoma. i am going to briefly go over the big picture with you, and john updike from the real-estate department will take you through the key agreement. the big picture is that the sfmoma plans to build a new wing to house the fischer collection. the have already acquired the hill college building and desires to acquire fire station number one, both of which are on howard street, around the corner from the museum. it would demolish both structures and construct a new wing, linking to the back of the existing museum. in a moment, i will have

diagrams for you. in return, the museum will build, at no cost to the city whatsoever, a new fire station at 935 folsom st.. as stated in the organs before you and in the agreement, the city has not yet completed environmental review of these projects. the agreement before you is a conditional agreement, setting out terms for the land transfer, contingent upon a number of independent actions to take place in the future, all of which are at the full discretion of the board of supervisors and other decision-making bodies. these include the completion of the ceqa process and certification of an eir, action to rezone the existing fire station property and the right of way on the street behind it, as well as to rezone the property for the new fire station. action to vacate the right away, approval of the actual new

museum building, and approval of the new fire station. as i mentioned earlier, we think this agreement is a win-win for the city and for moma. it allows the moma to build a new wing to house the world- renowned fischer collection and provides for the fire department and the fire station facility, which is superior in its physical layout and location to the existing fire station at no additional cost to the city. before john goes over with you the agreement, i just want to give you a sense of the overall big picture schedule for this project. we are expecting certification of the eir and project approvals in fall of two dozen 11. completion of the new fire station ready for use, fall of 2012. and completion of the new museum wing, summer 2015. again, all contingent on the approvals that i already mentioned. at this point, i will hand it over to john. i just want to say to you, after

john is finished with his brief presentation, we have representatives of numerous city departments and of the sfmoma key and answer any questions you might have. >> thank you. assistant director of real estate, good afternoon. the action that we are requesting today is adoption of an ordinance, which would approve a conditional land disposition an acquisition agreement between the city and the san francisco museum of modern art and its affiliates. exempting the fire station to be billed by the museum from competitive bid requirements. the agreement has the following key provisions -- i have up here a map of the city-owned property. the city will transfer to the museum fire station one at 676 howard st., and that is shown in pink on the map. as well as a remainder stub of hyde street, and that is shown

in yellow on the map. these have been appraised together, a combined value of $2,040,000. some photographs of the property, just to familiarize yourself with that site, are here. that was an independent appraisal completed recently. in return, the museum has purchased a parcel at 935 folsom st. shown here between fifth and sixth. the museum would allocate 9000 square feet of this parcel for a new fire station as well as 1800 square feet as a parking easement. those two assets have been appraised combined at a value of $2,350,000. in other words, that is in favor of the city. the museum would then build a new fire station for the city

at 935 folsom. that is an estimated cost of over $6 million. and then transfer this completed parcel and station in operating condition to the city. the new station at 935 folsom would serve the needs of the fire department much better than where we are currently located. it would provide much more space than currently provided, and it is a location which was in the search zone provided to staff and the museum associates early on by the fire department. the museum will be directed by the department of public works and the fire department staff on all the specifications necessary for the fire station to meet all the requirements that we have as a public facility. though the construction of a new fire station would be exempt from competitive bidding, it is important to note that it would be subject to requirements related to prevailing wage, resourced efficient building, equal benefits, and first source

hiring. we do not think it can be emphasized enough relative to the timing of this and the fact that the proposed agreement before you really establishes a framework for this real estate transaction between the city and sfmoma. does not commit the board or any other city decisionmaker to approving entitlements for the proposed sfmoma expansion project, the vacation of hunt street, where the proposed new fire station project. the land use and project entitlement approvals will come from the board of supervisors, the planning commission, and any other required city decision makers after completion of the internal review under the california environmental quality act. because these projects have not yet completed environmental review, the city expressly retains all of its regulatory discretion to approve or reject these projects.

approve alternatives to the project, or adopt mitigation measures. this reservation of discretion is discussed in considerable detail in the proposed agreement attached to your materials. once the city has completed the environmental review and approve the necessary project in thailand, the agreement before you comes to life and garments the terms of the real estate transaction, which the city and sfmoma would then finalize. again, we have representatives from fire, dpw, other jurisdictions, as well as the sfmoma team to answer any questions you may have. supervisor maxwell: all right, then, why don't we hear from the fire department? >> good afternoon.

do you have specific questions for me? supervisor maxwell: do you have a presentation or something that you have prepared? >> no, i do not. supervisor maxwell: supervisor, do you have questions for the fire department? supervisor chiu: i do have a question related to the previous speaker brown the lack of competitive bidding in this project. let me say that i have sat down of various product -- various parties on this project. i want to find various city officials as well as the fisher family for coming up with what i think is a wonderfully unique arrangement to get done what we all want to accomplish here, injuring the neighborhood pose a safety related to the need for fire safety, but obviously, bringing to the city an amazing collection. the piece of this that was not made as clear to me when we were going to this before was the

aspect of the lack of competitive bidding. i know that there was some mention before about the desire or intention to rely on for stores and potentially city built, but could you talk about how we would ensure that we do have local hiring and the various types of first source city built kind of programs are incorporated into what we're doing to make sure this will actually be a local project? >> sure, i can try to address that. with respect to competitive bidding, is - standing the competitive bidding is put into place when public money is being spent on a project to protect the taxpayers and make sure they get a good deal for the money. in this case, moma is obligated under the agreement to build the station regardless of what the cost is to them, so it made sense to ask you to exempt the project from competitive bidding. with respect to the local hiring or the lbe, it is our belief that because public money is not being invested in a project, it

is not subject to the lbe ordinance, although as john said, is subject to first source and all the other things that he mentioned. supervisor chiu: if i had heard the previous speaker correctly, it is the intent of the project sponsor to include those aspects. is that right? >> by the project sponsor, you mean the sfmoma with regard to the new fire station? supervisor chiu: right, i thought that in past presentations, i would heard that that would be part of it. >> it is the intent that it is mentioned in the agreement. i'm sorry, i'm just looking for my notes for the series of things -- oh, yes. subject to the city hosted prevailing wage resourced- efficient building, equal benefits, and first source hiring provisions. supervisor chiu: i'm sorry, which section are looking at? >> let me ask the deputy city attorney. let us know what section that is in.

>> i'm not sure. it is in the contract itself. there is a provision, section 11.21 of the agreement, does provide specific references to efficiency buildings prevailing wages and equal benefits. it does not meet the gates specific references in time to first source hiring, but there is a cover all provision that is in -- that says all applicable laws will be complied with by the museum, and it is our belief that first source hiring would apply. supervisor chiu: ok, we do not have in our binder a copy of that agreement. it is not in our binder. i would love to get a copy of it. i think that is indeed the case, that will probably address the concerns that i have that i think a number of my colleagues would have. i would love to see that language.

>> excuse me, could you hand this to the supervisor? oh, i'm sorry. supervisor maxwell: do you want to look over it? supervisor chiu: yes, let's take public comment, and i may have questions afterward. >> there are two sections that would be applicable. section 11.21, which would be on page 29 of the agreement, and the applicable law section is section 11.8, which is on page 26 of the agreement. supervisor chiu: thank you. supervisor maxwell: i don't think there are any questions for you at this time, unless you had something you wanted to add. >> yes, i would like to add something. this proposal is a win-win situation for the citizens of san francisco, moma, san francisco fire department.

currently, station one is located third and howard streets. it was built approximately in the 1950's. it was originally supposed to be a temporary location for the station until the location on jesse alley was renovated, but that never happened. since that time, the firefighters have operated out of a station in a highly congested area for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. the majority of their runs are in the tenderloin area. i would anticipate -- excuse me, i would say approximately 75% of the call volume is focused in the tenderloin and sixth street corridor. relocating to this location would decrease our response time. we would be better able to serve the population that we normally serve. we are really excited about this

project. if you find it reasonable and you agreed to approve it, it would be a great situation all the way a round. supervisor maxwell: great, thank you. all right, why don't we open this up to public comment at this time? >> supervisors, san francisco building and construction trades council. i have something of a personal relationship to the museum of modern art, as the many trades member committee a building in san francisco. i did work on the building, and although i did not work there for long, some of my work is very prominent on the building, particularly on the sky bridge. in fact, the artist in his all over series in "the chronicle"

showed in detail some of my work in a view that is not recognizable as the sky bridge unless you actually worked on it, but he showed the particular way in which i had handled my welds on that structure, and it was a nice instance of our reflecting craftsmanship, i think. that is in park what i will argue on behalf of this exchange, and that is that a building like the museum of modern art and its eventual extension offer a real opportunity for us to exhibit that kind of craftsmanship in the trades. they are the kind of building that really allows us to put forward the best of what we do. although supervisor daly noted last week, it is about the work, it is not all about the work. it is in this instance about the craftsmanship and about an institution that will be a delight to san francisco in years to come. thank you. supervisor maxwell: next.

>> good afternoon. director of sfmoma. pleasure to be able to appear before you and to know that you will be considering seriously this really innovative partnership between fire department and the museum. we are celebrating our 70th anniversary this year at the museum. we have 75 years -- our 75th anniversary. we have 75 years of great anniversary -- of cultural and public service. we had 650,000 visitors last year, for a dozen members, 30,000 students, and we employ 240 staff full-time -- 40,000 members. we had an incredibly salutary benefits advantage for the yerba buena neighborhood, and as we look forward and have a great opportunity with the fischer collection coming, we have the opportunity to again enhance the

yerba buena neighborhood, and especially howard street, by this expansion. it will allow us to create a new and livelier aspect on howard street. we will be able to relocate to what you just heard is a much better location for them, provide much better public service, and the arrangement we have made with the family is for the collection, which is one of the great collections anywhere in the world to come to the museum for no less than 100 years, so it is an extraordinary win-win-win, i would say, for the city, and we have taken a great pleasure in the relationships that we develop with the fire department in putting this together, so appreciate your giving this very serious consideration, and i and my team are happy to answer any questions you may have. thanks. >> good afternoon, supervisors. president of the san francisco

fire fighters. i would also like to speak in favor of this resolution, this item before you today. i think it is a great project for the city. i think it helps us with public safety. i think it helps us with our support of the arts in san francisco, and after many years, this station has become old and tired. this was once the busiest firehouse in america, and it has only just recently been passed by station 3 in the tenderloin, which is now the busiest firehouse in america. 30, 40, 50 years of backing a truck and engine in and out about 57 times a day will exert a lot of strain on a facility, and i think it is time to replace this one. as i said before, it is a great partnership, and i hope you support this project. supervisor maxwell: thank you. anyone else public comment? seeing none, then public comment is -- still open. no, then public comment is

closed. thank you. all right, collie, supervisor chiu, have you been -- >> i understand that apparently there was not a reference to ensuring that the first source hiring program would be applicable here. i'm fine, really, going either way on this, but i just wanted to make sure that that would be a commitment. seems like that would be a commitment of the parties to put that in the agreement. if folks would like to put that in, i would suggest that, but i would like to hear from the deputy city attorney. >> in reviewing this, in connection with this one question, there is apparently an inadvertent typographical error in the agreement in its current form. on 7.1k, which provides as a condition for the city's closing of this deal, it says, "city's compliance with all applicable laws." , and that should be "museum's

compliance with all applicable laws." that same language is replicated in section 7.3h. it says the same thing. in other words, in 7.1k, it should be "museum's" and that will be corrected. that would apply to first source hiring, which is applicable. that is within the definition of applicable laws. supervisor chiu: on this question of whether we need to amend the agreement to specifically first course -- first source hiring, you think that is something we need to do? >> i believe it would be the first was hiring is applicable, which i believe it is, we have already looked at that, that that would be redundant and unnecessary, but we could do that as well as long as we're going to make this one change. we could add those words to the specific provisions that are

addressed if it is deemed advisable by the partisan the board. supervisor chiu: 90. i guess i would look to the parties to say is that something that would be agreeable? -- thank you. >> from the cities and, it is totally agreeable. the jet from the city's end -- from the city's and. >> that is absolutely agreeable. we get at a reference to the first source hiring chapter of the administrative code -- we could add a reference to the first source hiring chapter. supervisor chiu: i'm not sure that requires a formal motion because the agreement is not in front of us, but as long as there is a commitment by the parties to do this, i'm comfortable with leaving it as it is and allow the parties to do that. >> that is right, and the committee does not have the jurisdiction to make an amendment to the contract. you have to have the parties agree, and they will submit new a new version.

supervisor chiu: great. supervisor maxwell: without objection -- again, supervisor. >> thank you. i'm here for items 5 and 6, but i would like to thank supervisor maxwell for letting me make a comment. as a supervisor who represents district two and the presidio, we have had a number of committee hearings right here in land use on the proposed museum in the presidio that clearly did not work out. but one thing that i do want to say is how thrilled i am to see this actually come to fruition, to see it at that one moment where i think we are finally taking that step to make a reality, and in so doing, i would like to thank everyone that was involved in it. i would certainly like to thank the fissures for their generous gift, which really cannot be underestimated. i would like to thank moma for all the hard work they have put

in to making all this work, and charles schwab, who before mr. fisher passed away, he was instrumental in helping to bring him to this point, and i just really do feel that this is one of the true great steps that san francisco will be taking in our cultural life and existence, and it is another facet, i think, to what we bring to the united states and our cities, so thank you very much. supervisor maxwell: thank you. and i remember the late nights when we were talking about this at the presidio, and for it to come into something that was so lovely, this is a win-win, and it is from what we remember that we went through -- this is just great. i want to thank all of you on behalf of, i think, the citizens of san francisco. they have a great gift. i think the family has always been a part of our city, and for them to remain here in this way is very elegant and great, so again, thank you very much.

without objection, so move. -- so moved. madam clerk, item five please. >> item 5, resolution imposing interim zoning controls requiring authorization for a change in child care facilities. supervisor maxwell: i would like to welcome supervisor alioto- pier. this is your item. supervisor alioto-pier: i'm here today to ask you for your support on this resolution that imposes interim zoning controls to protect child care facilities here in san francisco. for more than two years, i worked to save children's village, a program run by catholic facilities. i was disappointed to learn that there are no zoning projections for child care facilities. along with supervisors dufty and daly, i have introduced this resolution to ensure that when a child care center closes or is reduced in size, the new use

would require a conditional use of the recession. if the project sponsor replaces the child care on offsite would like services -- with a like services, no cu will be needed. i wanted to note that because this hearing is during the day, many working parents are unable to be here. however, we have received numerous letters in support, and the small business commission has voted to support this legislation as well. we are joined today by michelle rutherford of the human services agency, who will provide a brief overview of the city put the child care fixture, and a representative from the city's planning department to answer any questions you may have. thank you very much for being here today. >> thank you, good afternoon, supervisors. first, just quickly, for a brief

overview, child care is a critical economic support for san francisco, both for the work force and for employers. child care is a significant economic sector in its own right, generating over $191 million annually in gross receipts and employing over 4400 workers. child care lays the groundwork in san francisco for huge economic success by preparing the next generation and helping for school success for children as they come out of zero-five child care. there are 300 licensed child- care centers -- centers in the city and 621 licensed family child care homes with a total capacity of 18,246 serving children ages 0 to 13. i understand that this proposed resolution really is to address resolution really is to address centers, but i present the full