unwarranted risk. when the item went to our commission, our commission decided to allow for nine months where we could collect data on the safety of the operation at union square. that was a time that roughly coincided with the peak season where we felt that would be large enough that we could get an adequate sample size to determine what the true safety factors are, and then after that nine months, and actually, any point after that nine months, so if two and a half years in, the department decides is unsafe, we can seize the operation at union square. the department and the commission did feel strongly, though, that it was necessary to have an adequate amount of time to develop -- to generate some empirical data on the safety of

the operation at union square, rather than just having it be something we could cancel at any point. supervisor chu: what is the city's recourse if we find that two months down the line, maybe eight months down the line, there really is a problem? what can we do at that point in time? >> we would -- should we decide at any point before the nine months that there is a problem, we would work diligently with the lease see -- the lessee and any other relevant agencies to see if there are mitigation techniques we could put in place to ensure that bicycling is safe there. we would not have the ability to terminate the lease until that nine months, but we would work diligently with them, and i think our financial interests and there is, should it prove to be an on warrantable risk, i imagine that we would find it to

be [inaudible] supervisor chu: i would like to ask a question to the bicycle coalition in a little bit, but before you go, one more question -- with regards to the addition of additional space locations. currently, the site contemplates a number of different locations, and i'm just wondering what the department's plans are with potential expansions? what is probably on supervisor mirkarimi's mines is do we have huge expansions being anticipated? what is the daughter around with these expansions could mean? i understand his point, but on the other hand, i do like to see some level of flexibility for the department to be able to make adjustments depending on what the operation calls for. i would like to hear more about what that means. >> i think we certainly feel that this is the vast majority of the locations where we will have flexible rental concessions. we drafted least as such so that

we could have a little bit of flexibility. if in the future communities and neighborhoods have an interest in this amenity, i think a lot of san franciscans do rent bicycles. we are not all owners. if there are communities that want this amenity, we would have the flexibility to do it in a location that perhaps is not going to be as profitable and as large of an enterprise, but we would have the flexibility to go ahead with even a six-month program to determine the viability, determine the appropriateness after working with the community to see if there is support for it. i do not think we would expand significantly. i think there might be a couple of locations we would expand to, depending on support in the community. perhaps we could see something at ocean beach or lake merced,

but i do not think we are talking about the same significant number of our 220 parks. supervisor chu: one of the things i do know is having seen the sunday streets work out in the district, we have seen a lot of folks who really enjoy taking that bicycle ride along the ocean and to the zoo, even. as we think about the connectivity and being able to connect folks to side like potentially union square, justin herman plaza, a lot of folks might not be able to take advantage of that connection, should there not be future locations or sites available to do that out there. supervisor kim? supervisor kim: i was actually going to add that i actually support the amendment proposed by our policy analyst. supervisor chu: ok, any other questions from the committee? just so i can touch base with

the bicycle coalition, the recreation and park department had talked about union square and some of the safety issues there and having worked with bikers. what is your thoughts around safety around that area? for susan, i suppose. >> hello, there. the question is what is our experience with peace ago on -- people on bicycles traveling around union square. we have not heard of any complaints or reports of injury in the union square area. what we have heard is a lot of our work is done around market street, that being the artery to other neighborhoods. we are focusing a lot of our attention there right now. we do see all over the downtown area a lot of businesses requesting bicycle racks.

my understanding is people are bicycling in this area, but in terms of injury, we have not heard of anything. supervisor chu: do you think we will be able to work closely with you and your organization to improve the education on safety around the area? >> of course. we have a contract with the mta to do bicycle education, and as part of that, we would be more than happy to. especially thinking about a short, 1-page easy tips to offer to people renting a bicycle. i want to reiterate we work closely with the department of public works on construction- related issues on a bicycle lanes, how to make sure people on bicycles are afforded safety, and we would love to work specifically with the central subway team to make sure that everybody on a bicycle, with a tourist or resident, is able to get through the project area at all different phases. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you.

questions from the committee? seeing none, i believe we have a motion. do you have a question? supervisor mirkarimi: no, i wouldn't formally make a motion. i motion that we approve this proposal, amended as identified by the budget analyst that the board of supervisors wishes to retain the authority to approve future expansions of bicycle rental concessions, amend the proposed resolution stating policy conclusions section in this report, as already mentioned. >> thank you -- supervisor chu: thank you. i will be opposing the amendment. why don't we take a roll call vote on it? in particular, the language in page two, line seven, which would strike the word "enter into addition" -- would strike the word "additions" from line 7. >> on that motion, mirkarimi

aye kimaye aye. chu no. the motion passes. supervisor chu: the item as amended. >> as amended mirkarimiamended aye. kim aye. chu aye. the motion passes. supervisor chu: thank you. could you call items three, four, and five? >> -3, a hearing to receive a regular quarterly update from the public utilities commission on the water system improvement program to include information on projects completed to date, and corresponding cost for the completed project and schedule -- and corresponding cost for

scheduled and upcoming projects. the fund is a chapter for the water system improvement program. item five, resolution adopting findings under the california environmental quality act, including the adoption of a mitigate, monitoring, and reporting program and statement of overriding consideration related to the water system improvement program, calaveras dam it replacement project, at alameda county, including the mitigation habitat actions at various sites and directing the click of the board to notify the controller of this action. supervisor chu: thank you very much. mr. harrington. >> good morning. happy to be here today to talk about the water system improvement program and particularly calaveras dam. the wsip is going amazingly strong. the last of our megaprojects is

a really large regional projects, is the calaveras dam project, and the project manager will be discussing that. and we have an item for closed session related to the calaveras dam it. we have a number of senior staff here from the puc because this is an important thing to us, and we will all be available for any questions you have. i am about to turn it over to delete. >> good morning, supervisors. mr. clark, if you would not mind connecting the computer -- mr. clarke -- mr. clerk. i'm here to provide you the latest updates on the program. i will -- the data i will share with you today applies from october 2010 until now. since supervisor kim may not be as familiar with the water system improvement program, i wanted to start with a brief summary of the overall program.

this is a multiple year capital improvement program that was initiated in late 2002 to upgrade the city's water system in an effort to improve its seismic and delivery reliability as well as meet water quality requirements and diversify our water supply portfolio. the program includes a total of 86 projects of various size. anywhere from a few million dollars to over $400 million. the projects are spread over a very wide geographical area from the sierra foothills all the way to the city, and our current budget currently stands at $4.6 billion, and our schedule calls for completion of all improvements by the end of 2015. the project are divided, really, into two sub-programs -- local and regional. we have for the local project located within the city of san francisco that benefit only city

residents. these projects are typically smaller, and they include improvements to the city distribution pipelines, storage reservoirs, and pump stations. we have 46 regional projects spread over seven different counties. those regional projects are typically much larger in size, and they benefit both city residents and the 27 wholesale agencies served by the puc. they include a wide variety of improvements ranging from dam projects, reservoirs', tunnels, large pipelines, and treatment facilities. if we look at our latest programs that is, starting with our local projects, what you have here is a high chart showing the number of projects and the value of these projects in each of the phases of the program. we only have six out of 40 local projects that have yet to reach construction. the biggest piece of the pipe here is designed.

we have four remaining projects. you should know that two water supply projects count actually for a majority of the total value. construction has been completed on 29 or 3/4 of our local projects. similar formats for the regional program. the biggest piece of the pipe here is in the construction phase. we only have six remaining regional projects -- six private remaining in planning and design. the total value of the projects currently in construction is approaching $2 billion. if you look at the bid and award in that phase, we have nearly an additional billion dollars worth of work and that is just about to get into construction. the 18 projects currently in construction have a value that exceeds half of the total program value. we have completed 15 or 1/3 of

our regional projects as of today. shown here is a summary of our cost and schedule variances at the program level. this is basically the variance between what was approved and what is now forecasted for the last two reporting quarters. if we focus our attention on the second and third columns for the regional programs, you can see that our forecast is unchanged. we are still forecasting to complete the program by the end of 2015. cost wise, we are forecasting a $175 million cost under run, which is $81 million less than the previous reporting quarter. the last two columns document the variances on the local program. these variances have changed over the last two reporting quarters. we are predicting a cost overrun

of $31 million on our local project. that is mostly due again to the water supply projects. water supply projects have a total overrun of $42 million, which is partly offset by $11 million under run on all the remaining other local projects. we have a 13-month delay that is being forecasted, and this is due to the san francisco west side recycled water project. all non-water supply projects will be completed nine months earlier, in february 2015. this chart compares the approved budget for the program, which is the red line, to our forecast over the last four quarters. you can see that we continue to see a downward trend in the overall cost for the program due

to a very competitive bid environment. our projected costs have been under the budgeted amount over the last four quarters. as i mentioned, between the first and second quarters, our forecast went down $81 million. wanted to briefly go over some of our achievements. since october 2010, we have advertised four regional construction contracts that have totaled $624 million. those include the contracts of two of our most critical projects -- the calaveras dam and the harry tracey water improvement project. we have issued notice to proceed on construction of five projects and have completed two. we also had an independent review panel go over all panelcm programs, -- go over all our cm

programs. the findings of the review were extremely positive. we received high marks for a number of our construction management practices. finally, i wanted to mention that we have completed the first of three title training class is in partnership with the northern california district council of laborers, and i'm happy to report that we were able to place all 10 graduates from that first class on our project. of course, given the size and complexity of a program like this, there are some major challenges that we must tackle. the permitting process for some of our more environmentally sensitive projects require very extensive negotiation with resourced agencies. in some cases, they have resulted in additional litigation costs. some of our projects are currently being impacted by archaeological discoveries and

contaminated soil and groundwater, and that has resulted in some cost increases as well. finally, maintaining water service to all our retail and wholesale customers while building $4.6 billion worth of improvement, of course, provides some major challenges. i think the puc operating staff is to be commended on how they have been able to manage the operational risks associated with shutting down a major section of our system to accommodate all the construction work. also wanted to mention that the stakeholder process that is required to deliver water supply projects, recycled water and ground water, can be quite extensive, and it has caused some delays in these projects. before i end my presentation, i wanted to share with you from -- some photographs of the incredible work taking place in

the field, and i wanted to extend an invitation to have you join us in the field at any time when your schedule allows. i would be glad to give you a tour of the construction site. the test facility is now 92% complete. this will be the largest alter pilot treatment facility in the state. to increase energy efficiency, we will be installing solar panels on the roof of one of the buildings. we are anticipating to be substantially complete on this project next month. this is the sunol valley water treatment project. work on the project is also proceeding as planned, and we are now 23% complete over there. just down the road is the

construction site for the alameda project. this is one of our most critical seismic reliability project, as it provides a lifeline for seismically robust conduit across the calaveras fault. the project is well on its way to being completed at 81%, and substantial completion is anticipated in september. the team for the new irvington , mobilized in 2010, the work focused on the tunnel portals and the immediate shaft. you see here one of the three road had is that will be used for digging the tunnel. i'm being told that excavation work will begin by the end of this week. supervisor mirkarimi: my son would love this truck. >> is that right? supervisor mirkarimi: he totally would dig this truck. he is so enamored with these kind of vehicles now. >> we would be more than willing

to provide a tour and see the real thing. construction on the bay toddle has been going very smoothly so far. this is going to be the first tunnel under san francisco bay. what you see here is the work being done at the launching shaft where we will lower the tunnel boring machine. i think the machine on the project is going to be even more impressive, and that will be showing up on sites in may of this year. another great for opportunity, by the way. -- another great tour opportunity. this is also progressing well. the photograph was taken several months ago, so my understanding is that the roof work is at least half way down here. we're standing at 57% completion at this point. substantial completion predicted to be reached in may.

finally, here, we issued the construction notice to proceed on the lower crystal springs dam improvement project a couple weeks ago after months of negotiation with environmental permitting agencies. what you see here is an image of the work performed by san mateo county on the road that was on top of the dam. the demolition work was completed just on time for us to start our own activities at the site. before i n, i wanted to extend an invitation to join us on march 30 for a media event on all our peninsula projects. the event will be at 9:30 by the crystal springs reservoir. we will make sure that your office receives an official invitation in the hope that you can attend. with that, i will take general questions about the program, and then, i will let danville into more details on calaveras.

but if you have any questions on the program presentation. supervisor chu: 40 local projects, on the slide that you showed, you indicated there were four projects currently in the planning stages -- for the local projects. >> in design. >> which ones are those? >> the big ones on the west side recycle water project and the san francisco ground water project. i believe the fourth one on top of my head would be the hunters point reservoir. those are much smaller projects, but of the $229 million value for these four projects, the two water supply and those are the ones that require much more extensive stickler involvement process. supervisor chu: you said

calaveras was the last such banter regional project remaining? >> it is the project currently overall control the overall completion of the program. supervisor chu: thank you. do we want to go to the calaveras projects? >> good morning, supervisors. i am the regional manager for the water system improvement manager. i am also a project manager for the calaveras dam replacement. if we could go to the map, thank you.

as you know, the calaveras dam and reservoir key components of the regional water system, water stored in calaveras is merged with water from the hitachi valet for delivery to customers in the east bay and elsewhere in sent to cisco. the existing dam is located in the southeast bay area, near pleasanton. approximately 132 square miles, of which approximately 3,500 acres are owned by the city of san francisco. east bay regional park district runs a park that is north of the reservoir, which is our closest neighbor in the vicinity. the dam is located one third of a mile from the calaveras fault, one of the three major

earthquake faults in the san francisco area. the calaveras reservoir is the sfpuc's largest local reservoir, allowing a storage of almost 100,000 acre-feet of water. it provides 40% of the local water storage and 66% of the local water yield for the regional water system. in 2001, the sfpuc lowered water levels in the reservoir due to seismic concerns and a mandate from the california division of safety of cans, due to concerns over the seismic safety. the reservoir is currently operating at about 40% capacity. this is a perspective from about 2,000 feet above the wilderness. the existing earth and rock filled dam is existed here. it was completed in 1925,

modified in 1974, to increase the seismic stability of the structure. however, as the years has passed and our knowledge has increased, we know now that the than the to be replaced. you can see the bathtub ring around the reservoir. that represents 50 feet of vertical height of water storage, about 60% of the capacity. the proposed project would simply restore the water level to its historic capacity. this slide shows the existing ban on the left. it was the largest earth-fill dam in the world when it was completed in 1925. the rendering is shown on the right. the new dam would be built immediately downstream of the existing. the existing dam would be used -- there is a coffer dam that would be used during construction. essentially, that would hold the

old stand back, so that we can build a new one downstream. the lower picture is a cross section to the existing dams, showing the zones of the material that we use in construction. project purpose is to replace the existing band with a damn that meets the current seismic safety standards and can accommodate a future enlargement, if future generations decide. upon completion of this project, the division of safety provision would be lifted. the project would help meet the level of service objectives for the overall water system improve the program. -- improvement program. the requested action before you today are to release the reserve of $330,000,000.500 $10,000 to fund the construction and related cost of the project, to

adopt the findings under california environmental quality act, including the mitigation, monitoring, and quality program. and to direct the clerk of the board to notify the controller of these actions. i know you are aware we have received an appeal on the ceqa findings from the east bay regional parks district, which was filed on february 14, 2011. as we will discuss in closed session, sfpuc has reached a settlement with the east bay regional parks district, and will be forwarding the settlement. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you very much. is there further presentation with regard to the ceqa item? >> i did not necessarily prepared to speak to the ceqa item in detail, but i can certainly tell