interchange. there is a lot of natural water right in this place. there's a lot of interest in this community about the eastern portions in bringing the water forward. there is a concern if there is creek water, ground water that is being mixed with sewage upstream, then the question is how will we use it downstream where we want to use it? this is a real concern and i have been talking with staff about this and i think that these are questions that i am still not 100% clear about and i would urge you to look at this also. not only that, but this comes

down 26 street and this is the most northernmost portion of the watershed which is the largest in san francisco. not only is this the drainage base but there is ground water. this is also the creek water. the new goal is old. this is fresh water. i think that we need to be more protective and respectful of this and also understand the multiple committees that are connected by this watershed. this is a very complex issue. the seven-foot pipe that you are about to vote on is the old paradigm. this is the old way of solving the mitigating flooding. we are embarking on the new paradigm of looking at watershed

management. i just want you to beware of the implication of this pipe. this sounds very benign but there are a lot of implications with this type and i apologize to the waste water team because i know their heart is in the right place but i really question this. bernanke. >> this is the old way of doing things. something that we want to do is rest use some of those. if you want to separate the system and say what do we do with the water, we put it in a creek. the question is, maybe this is something that we can work on

while the clock is ticking. are there any changes that need to be made to the design or construction said that we will be able to create this once we figure it out. my concern is that the program here has no hydrological goals. it will be capturing storm water, we don't know what we wanted to do. this is phase two of the flooding project. there is no measure of what this is supposed to handle. this is an investment without a purpose. we have an understanding of what we are spending money on and why we are spending it. maybe this will be great and we will find out it does a lot but right now what it is is window dressing. this is not what we should be

spending our money on. it will not look good when we say how much water we have diverted. >> thank you. >> this was reviewed substantially. is that correct? >> i am the project manager. >> we have received these projects. this did it -- this did go through the day - declaration. >> all of those steps were taken.

>> did they agree with the supposition? >> because this is the declaration, no response is required from city planning. they did receive it and they did not have any recomments that we. >> and they did not raise this to a higher level towards us. >> the city did go ahead and approve the project. >> it begs the question, that is this right thing to do? >> my version would be if we were doing this project 10 years from now, it would be 8 different project.

we would be learning a whole lot as we go through this whole planning process. i think it would be different in 10 years. the issue is can we wait and -- in the meantime. what are the tradeoffs. if we made this a smaller pie, for example, how much would we say if we put that money into avoidance and would we get much out of that? what i found as we would save a little bit of money and we still need a pipe because there was still be sewage. a pipe has to go in. the real issue is how much can you avoid if you thought you could do something else with storm water. the issue is to do something different with storm water. it can take quite a bit of money. this watershed in your budget is 120 million or more because you are talking about the largest watershed in san

francisco and multiple creeks and fault, multiple levels. this will start at the top. we have to go upstream into a whole lot of things. over time, it might mean that some of the capacity of this pipe will not be used, hopefully. if we can make those changes, maybe we will only use a portion of this. i don't know. certainly, we don't believe you should wait to figure that out when they are also going through a planning process and this is the underpinning of that process. all this means is that the city would have to go ahead and wait and let it fly 45 for 10 years and hope for the best. >> $15 million if you made the pipes smaller. no where near the 100 million that it takes to change the

entire watershed habitat. >> this would be a solid type, not like the one that was used -- >> what about putting this off 1-2 years? >> at one point, this was a multi agency project. everyone else was in there. everyone else is waiting for us to improve this to make this happen because if this does not happen, they cannot do the rest of the investment. >> i just have two questions. can you tell me how many jobs we are talking about with respect to the construction? is there an estimation on how many hours there are and how that will go into the higher

ordinance? >> deconstruction duration is 500 days. -- in order to have the construction completed in 24 months. we expect the contract to have two crews of people. one will be doing excavation, trenching, basically laying down the pipes. typically, that would be a crew of at least three laborers, one or two operators, a truck

driver. you have about 10 people including operators and laborers working in the area at any one time. we are also meeting the 50% chephren -- good faith threshold. this area has suffered and the major intersections including mission street.

they have filed claims against the city would do to the damages that they have suffered that time. this has been in the works since 2005. we go through the designing phase and we have gone through the secret documents. i guess the answer, if we don't move on this and we want to wait, then there would be a long-delayed and at least two years. that is the risk we will be taking, if these properties flood again, then we are not adjusting those for the community and the residences and businesses in that area that flooding that the half and suffering from. -- that they have been suffering from. >> you brought up some good points. while you were speaking, we

actually got some kind of response. i wanted to get some development on something specific that was referenced in town they referenced daylighting the creek. can you develop on what has been done or not done with respect to that particular reference? >> in terms of daylight in the creek, that is a much bigger undertaking. it will have to tie in with the urban watershed framework that we are doing right now. we actually had a tributary amount that can show you the area that flows into cesar chavez. i hope that this will give us some idea of how much flow is actually contributing to the

project area. the whole area, when we have a rain event, all of the water contributes to the cesar chavez pipeline. in order to not have a timeline, we will need to work upstream and work from the top in that area. >> can we go back to this? >> i think this figure shows exactly because this is 1,400 acres that are draining down. all of that is making his way through the pike. we would be starting upstream. the first phase was to put in the pipe and also to repair the existing store lines that are 100 years old when we look at the urban watershed from work, we will be looking for out watershed. we will be looking at

daylighting and some cases, that will be the separation of the source and it might need separating storm water and wastewater so that we can keep it isolated and keep it out of the system to buy back the capacity. i drove cesar chavez and this is really crowded. having this flooding or the public, is that this can cause is something that is worrisome. we will be continuing to work on this. we will quantify the issues that were brought to light, how much storm water removal and what did they buy. >> you have not done any up- front modeling. it seems that if you introduce this like some absorption or whatever amount he would be able to say, you actually don't need

that. the goals we have set, those we were able to keep out of the pipe. >> the issue is that this would be on cesar chavez at this is for 200 acres. just because you keep up a small amount of water has no connection with the flooding. we have all the rest of these going downhill. >> couldn't you do these upstream? >> yes, it would take years to do. you are talking but changing the entire flow of the largest watershed in san francisco and that is why we are putting a whole bunch of money into this. that will take a long time to figure out how to do that, how to deflect the water, how to put it into creeks and we should not

be too simplistic. these are bigger issues that you will not fix with just this one project. thank you. >> also, we heard the presentation about global warming. what we think we know about that is that it is likely to produce a higher intensity storms. that exacerbates the flooding problem and frankly it calls on higher capacity facilities safely at the system. if we ended up by virtue of the circumstance having a little extra capacity in the system, that does not bother me at all. if we were to encourage

additional costs or for that matter, if we were to downsize a pipe five years down the road that we needed to increase, that is a hugely expensive mistake to correct. without any diminution of interest, without a great deal of knowledge, i am very comfortable proceeding with the project and developing for a long time and solving some problems that we know our real that affect people day-to-day and if it ends up with a little extra capacity in the system, i am for it. >> well, you know, i have been talking to staff and that is where i have landed ultimately

and that is why i keep urging that if we do move forward with this to please continue to engage the public. we would like to do the watershed planning and introduce the lid and work towards these common goals that we have and whether they take a change order or whatever it is, the commission would be open to that if it will show some major reduction of storm water into the system and what we can really be achieving. >> thank you. >> there's no other comments from the commissioners. >> do we have a motio>> we will.

all those in favor? moving forward. >> [inaudible] >> i am not sure that we have many questions for you. is there a motion to adopt item

number 11? >> i will second. >> public comment. all those in favor. thank you. the motion carries. the next item. >> [inaudible]

>> it is there a motion to a top item number 12? >> all those in favor? >> next item? >> given the length of the meeting, we will not be doing close session items. >> we will continue the closed session. and this will be at the next meeting.

>> is there other commission business? >> hearing none, this meeting is adjourned. tape 55

>> welcome, this is carl. >> great to meet you. >> great to me you, and i want to thank you for your interest and this is the city's animal shelter. and come in and a lot of people come here to adopt a animal or if they have lost their animal or looking for other animals. and we deal with other animals like birds and rabbits and you name it. this is more to see in this facility and more to see in the community. and i suggest you go with an animal control person and see what they co, whether rescuing animals in distress or hit by a car or dealing with aggressive animals or wildlife or a

variety of things. you can only get that flavor with them and doing it first hand. >> i have been with animal control for about six years, i spent a year in the kennel and then the office came up and i started doing it and it really fit. it's really the job for me. and animals i have to handle and i know what i am doing, i rarely get scared. [whistle]. we do a lot of investigations and most are not as bad as people report but everyone once in a while they are. and i had one and people had moved out and the dog was in the inside and it makes me teary and when the dog is in the

backyard, and i can pull an animal out of a horrible environment and feel good. >> where does this animal go after this? >> they go for the shots and then the kennel. >> and if they just found this, and once we enter everything in the computer and they can track to find out if the dog went back home. we hold them for five days. >> this is a stray dog and it came in today and we immobilize it and then put it in a room with food and water. >> and then evaluate for medical behavior and see if anyone is interested in adopting then. >> we want to be sure that

their behavior is good for the average adopter and not aggression problem, toward people or animals. >> and if they growl and don't bite the hand, she passes that. and good girl, in case she has something in her mouth, we get it out. and one more test, called the startle test and it startled hear but she came to me. and passed the handling test. >> for the mental exam i feel for lumps and bumps. and the ears and see if they are infected and look at the eyes and be sure they are clear and don't have cataracts and

look at their teeth and heart. this is the first job that i feel i make a dvrngs. -- difference. and we may do 40 to 80 animals a day for treatments. and do blood work and skin scrapings and cultures to diagnose different diseases. and x-rays, i can take an animal that would be euthanized at a different shelter and fix it and get it ready for a home. >> we have a partnership and we let a professional groomer run a private business from our facility and in turn grooms our shelter animals. what is the big deal of that? when someone comes to adopt an animal, if it looks good,

chances are it will be adopted more. >> and we groom and clean the ears and the works. >> typically a shelter wouldn't have grooming? >> not at all. and these dogs are treated with the utmot -- utmost care that others can't provide. this is a shampoo to bring out the luster. and i feel satisfied in helping the shelter pets be adopted and to be a part of such a wonderful staff, from the top all the way down. if she passes our evaluation, she will stay until she's adopted. if you are interested in adoption and don't want to put them to sleep, that means at a last resort, we will give you a call before putting to sleep.

you are not bound to the dog, and we would give you a call, and it's an actual adoption and cost $107 and it will be your dog. >> the volunteers to meet are the unsung heroes in this field that take the animals to hope and nurse them to get strong enough to come down and rehome. without volunteers, i would have to be honest to say this wouldn't be much more than a pound. we thank god that we have the number of committed people coming down and helping us out, it makes all the difference in the world. >> when you want to come in and volunteer, you go through a general orientation, about two hours.