here, but as it relates to this issue, certainly, it is something that we feel compelled at least to learn more on the delivery of those services to people in this city, particularly those who are indigent and not able to be insured. i work next to six street, so i encounter a lot of it. the reagan years, everybody talks about and not place in these types of facilities. it is still an ongoing discussion that we will not resolve through this project, i don't think. but hopefully, if something positive comes out of the

legislation, we're looking at the master plan around health, and then we will look at some of the issues comprehensively, with the city dictating the terms as opposed to these individual projects, institutions, corporations, i am not quite sure how to describe it. but anyway, i am tired, and it has been a long day. i don't want to repeat what has already been said. i think i could borrow commissioner miguel's notes and it would probably be verbatim,, and look over commissioner borden's shoulder, but i think a lot of it was just coming from her heart. and some of the other commissioners as well. i agree with what i have heard here. and the members of the public.

as has been stated before, the project sponsor has become familiar with the land use and zoning before proceeding with the project and to understand what the cost might be to that project, should they proceed. and have a lot of demands, as this project does. i know that it is kind of vague. one of the points, numerous authorizations at all three campuses. at some point, i would like to see more of a breakdown. the you have that in this? we will go over it later. it i see that, yes. there are quite a few here. one thing i have been curious about, the van ness sud and the housing obligation, i imagine if the conditional use was not accepted by the commission, the

requirement of the sud, what time would that be? i know the $73 million is based on the and the use fee, correct? for affordable housing, yeah. right, yeah, so i i don't know if you have an answer. >> that is based on 20% of the full housing bill out. rigid the full house and build out. it would be the market rate. at 20% of the affordable portion, it would be the market rate cost, effectively for those 1100 units. president olague: okay, thank you. anyway, i guess i met a similar

place. at some point, i don't know, it is the staff working with the block association and the neighbors? is someone from our department helping? >> commissioner, i have been interacting with the block association, facilitating our conversation with cpmc. although there has been no resolution, those discussions are moving. i am not sure there will be resolved before the larger issues are resolved, but they're moving together in parallel. president olague: i appreciate where the mayor's office and public health and you are, so i appreciate this as a starting point and to go from here, but not to, you know, go backwards. i think this is a good starting point.

at some point, i imagined conversations will start with the community that are separate from this, but i think this, as a minimum, it is at a good place, so i support so far what i am hearing from the mayor's office and dph as it relates to some of those requests. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: thank you. i think the short answer might be if we did not grant conditional use and required cal pacific to build the required three-one housing, as is part of the van ness plan, i think it should not be applied to institutions. as i said earlier, there would be no project. comparatively, stanford is providing the city of palo alto with $6.9 million of housing. again, you cannot always compare things, but just to give the perspective, these are

hospitals, they're not in the housing business. yes, they should absolutely replace the housing have displaced and take care of the individuals, but as far as the other is concerned, i think they should do something, but not like the asking. we used to be the city that knows how. remember as a youngster my father and mother coming from the livermore valley to seek medical care in san francisco because the hospitals were better here, the specialists were here, and that is the way it should be. we have to remain a source of excellence, and i disagree with commissioner moore with disassembly. that seems like more is being built. a new state of the york hospital and two new state of the art hospitals and the increase in davies and the increase in pacific, and possibly the california campus is converted to something else.

i see more, not less. there is always a talk about the impact and the negative impact. well, van ness avenue is not the garden area of san francisco, i am sorry to say. there are a lot of vacancies, problems, it is not really vital. this will bring jobs and businesses and will do a lot for that area, deployed a lot of people who are not employed and the whole discussion about jobs as part of the hospitals is what we're talking about. that's not always look on the dark side. the impact also include the good impact this hospital will have. i think we have to look at that. the st. luke's issue, i agree, commissioner moore, a longer time would make sense to keep it that much into the hospital. it should be here hopefully in definitely, but i think it's size is appropriate. it was a private hospital years ago. it was able to function.

as times change and neighborhoods change, it became nonfunctional. it was long before cal took over that it was not going to work. and the fact they are rebuilding the hospital i think is something that is not economically the best thing for them, but it is something that the committee wanted and everybody agreed. it is not built now, and i think that is the appropriate size. every service assault on that list is being continued, as far as i can see. it seems like it is a full- service hospital, probably appropriate in size for the area. president olague: something else i wanted to mention, we are talking about, yeah, increasing the size where venice is coming up and the size in general, which we approved. mission bay i think is limited to women and children only. what we have failed to mention

is we have in the past -- some of us, not all of us -- have approved developments that are fighting upwards of close to 50,000 new residents into san francisco. that being the case, we really have to start thinking about where these people will live. there is hunters point development. i forget how many tens of thousands, yeah, of residents we're looking at there. treasure island, we're looking at close to 20,000 new residents, and then there is part merced, which is a lot of people there, too. that said, i think, you know, there are a lot of things we need to look at when we decide where the most appropriate place for health care is. i just wanted to make mention of that. commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: maybe it is in some of our materials anywhere, but i cannot recall --

on the other campuses that are potentially downsizing along california and i believe also webster street, wherever the facilities are going to be downsized and the potential for sale of those properties, i want to know what the underlying zoning is and, i don't know, but it will be if a hospital use goes away. what the underlying zoning would be. >> the california and pacific campuses are zoned rh-2, so institutional uses are permitted, but the other principal use is the two-family dwelling. commissioner sugaya: ok, cool. president olague: ok. >> if i may also just thank staff.

especially elisabeth. i think the staff presentation was well organized and coordinated and answered a lot of questions. it was very easy to understand. i want to thank you for your work. also, all the departments for being here, especially the department of public health, thank you, director. i thanked one of the good thing. i think one of the good things about these large projects is we get to collaborate with people who are from completely different fields and different perspectives. i think it is very helpful for us to learn other people's lines of business when we're doing these projects. i think you all for your work and help on this. president olague: ok. secretary avery: thank you. that concludes tonight's public informational session on cpmc. planning commissioners, you still have the general public comment. president olague: is there any general public comment on items not on the agenda? no?

seeing none, general public comment is closed and the meeting is adjourned. supervisor avalos: good morning. welcome to thursday, june 9, 2011 meeting of the san francisco board of supervisors meeting. my name is david campos. i am the chair of the committee.

we are joined by president david chiu, as well as a mark farrell who will be here shortly. we want to thank sfgtv staff who are covering the meeting. madam clerk, do we have any announcements? >> i would like to announce to please turn off all riinger volumes on cell phones. and--- ringer volumes on cell phones. supervisor campos: thank you. if you could please call item one. >>item 1, hearing to receive regular status reports on the america's cup. supervisor campos: this is

something i introduced with supervisor mirkarimi. we want to make sure that we provide the necessary oversight in the implementation of this -- of the various agreements that are implemented, and more specifically to make sure that all of the interests of the city and county of san francisco are protected come into the extent that there are certain obligations that those are met not only on the city part, but on the part of the cities involved. we have been joined by committee vice chair supervisor farrell. with that, i will turn it over to stop. >> good morning. mike martin and office of economic and work force development. i am pleased to come before you today to update you on the progress towards achieving the

ambitious but exciting projects outlined in the host and the new agreement for the 34 america's cup event. -- and the venue agreement for the 34th america's cup event. i have documents describing the even-related obligations. broadly speaking, these are the associationthings associated wie event itself and focuses away from the real-estate and those types of things. obviously we can get into more detail on each item in the memo or the presentation itself. with that, i will turn to the slide. i see that it is already up. a quick overview of the presentation. we will start out with a background for those who want to know more about what the event looks like it's self and what it

embodies in terms of bringing those events for work. we will go through the organizational structure between the parties and swell as the intergovernment parties and the agreements. describe the permiting process, which is obviously a critical part of achieving what is proposed, and must be completed before any final decisions can be made. a set of plans that are called for under the agreement, as well as additional plans relating to the events that we feel would help make clear operational needs of what needs to be done to achieve, to create the picture we're trying to create. lastly, i would like to go through topflight description of the federal and state court nation of birds along the key aspects of bringing these teams and the vent stack to san francisco in the way that is called for in the event the agreement. -- and event staff brcoming to n

and cisco and the way that is called for in the event agreement. the america cup protocol was signed that detailed the rules bringing the 34 america's cup for work. the host agreement is the america's cup organizing committee. that is a locally-formed non- profit corporate group. they are mainly charged with partnering with the aca in bringing forward corporate partnerships and other funding mechanisms for the partnership and local fund raising, a philanthropic efforts to cover $34 million of public cost of putting on the events. as i mentioned, there is a memo

that describes in more detail the city obligations that are called for under the host venue agreement. i think the key backbone of the city's obligation of the ball around three things -- revolved around three things. completing the ceqa process. completing the plant, which i described earlier in will explain further as we move forward, and secure federal and state permits for authorizations. also, the event activities themselves on the event days. a little background on the proposed event timeline. there will be an initial series of what are being called the america's cup world series events. these are in effect a tour of things that do not linked directly to the competition of

the 34 america's cup, but incorporate the same teams, 45 foot version of the 72 boats coming in for the america's cup events, and are designed to start giving people a good picture of what this new era of america's cup racing will look like with fixed sale, solid-wing sales, and incredibly high speeds. a very exciting prospect. the first three races -- locations have been set for this year. and portugal, plymouth, and late in the year in san diego, california. next year there will be several even, two of which are planned for san francisco. those would be somewhere in july-september. most likely one even in august and one in september, but that has not been totally finalized. in 2013, we will have the

america's cup event itself. starting with the wethe louis vn cup event. then it likely the oracle a bench. then in september would be the america's cup final, the defender against the challenger for the america's cup and a set of best of nine races. this diagram depicts the race. that has been proposed. -- this diagram depicts the race area that has been proposed. this is generally the box they are looking at. i think actually based on the kind of racing action they are looking for, the races themselves will be confined to a much smaller area, which obviously has benefits in terms of facilitating traffic around

the races while they are happening. as you can see, they will be close proximity to the north and water in san francisco and islands of the north bay, which obviously accords spectator experience that has not been seen at the america's cup in pass defense. -- in past events. the shows the proposed locations for the 2013 events, which include facilities a log the port waterfront starting at the south at pier 80. pierce 30, 32 were proposed to be improved to be the team of bases where the boats would be serviced, taken in and out of the water. moving north from their, you would have potential in affect back office or team logistics operations, 26 and 28 right by the bridge. pierce 19 and 20 would be even to increase operations as well as media operations. -- would be events and med

logistics operations, as well as media operations. there would be other thing supporting the events, some even seating and other things. as you move north along the northern waterfront to you will have a number of public access areas that the authority is seeking to basically program, put in attractive things that not only enhanced the visitor experience, but also to manage crowds expected. the start with national park service plans at fort mason, moving through the city's and to christie field and the west. moving north from there, there will be some hospitality corporate sponsorship defeneven

likely at the national park service plans. potentially a hospitality event at alcatraz. that would not be a spectator area obviously for the difficulty of access. that is generally the picture for 2013. i think for 2012 you will see a similar picture except for the waterfront areas. those areas will be under construction. we're trying to move through that as quickly as possible to spread out the excitement a little bit, but also give a more attractive place for the teams and spectators to come to. our are reached to datout reachn really exciting. even those that would like to see the things improved in the current plans. we have had 3500 merchants and businesses. i actually just came from a liaison committee with a lot of

excitement talking about the various opportunities for san francisco. obviously this is a key part of bringing on the promise of the america's cup. as i said, i think engagement in community feedback has been strong at the meetings and by written feedback. we have had a number of written documents posted on the web site, as well as posted at americascup.com/sanfrancisco web site. hopefully this will start acting as the attraction for people that are hoping to come and enjoy the events. we also have a facebook and twitter page. we work with them to make sure the city is well-represented in terms of the things we're working on. this slide is hard to see. i put it up not for the details,

but to show we have a pretty complex and thus far pretty complex organizational structure in terms of the federal, state, and local partners, as well as other initiatives that are focused on the parties of the host and venue agreement. the next slide will break this off into a clearer picture each. i wanted to get a sense that all of these individual activities are rolling into a progress, the america's cup or nation committee. the representatives from each of these boxes report on what has happened in the past month in the next thought. >> president chu, do you have another copy of the presentation? -- president chiu, do you have another copy of the presentation? >> i am sorry. that may get back on thlet me ge

slide. these are interagency task forces that have been set up across a number of areas. obviously we need a great deal of coordination. from left to right on the top line we had the initial meeting of local bay area governments this past month, which is very exciting, and i think the pressure it being involved in the process. the next one i will talk a little bit more about the interagency coordination at the d.c. level and authorizations from federal law we will need. the public safety committee, which includes law enforcement and fire and emergency medical services. transportation committee, which includes not only city stakeholders, but also several meetings with the regional transit committee with the regional partners trying to make the regional transit strategy a centerpiece of making this as sustainable as possible, and i

will talk in more detail about the people planned transportation strategy later on in the presentation. the next one, event venues. this is planned -- programming at the park lands and programming of the waterfront, and also, what we would like to do is expand the breadth of that conversation to other places. with public access, views of the bay, and economic opportunities where we really want to see the economic promise brought home. the last, but certainly far from the least important, it is the water cord nation. the u.s. coast guard has taken a leading role in been extremely collaborative, and we appreciate it. they have led a number of meetings, including presentations at the harbor safety committee. convening of marine task force and shipping and recreational

boating interest, as well as the neptune coalition of law enforcement agencies. i think we have already seen a great deal of cooperation across those platforms, and we look forward to doing that in a way that not only brings these grievance forward, the safeguards the bay as a key way for commerce and recreation as well as commuters and transportation. -- that not only brings these events forward, but safeguards the bay as a cs a key way for commerce and recreation as well as commuters and transportation. the left-hand column, operational domains, really focuses on marketing sponsorships from the event authority perspective. communications, thing coordinated across all the different means by which people

are trying to get the message out about the plans we are bringing to san francisco. staff and visitors services, which incorporates a lot of different pieces, including the people that are coming to san francisco to work for the event authority or teams, as well as facilitating different obligations in terms of the pose venue agreement. most of these is the youth involvement. that is a key obligation of the authority that we're working with them to develop an inventory of the opportunities to leverage the great progress we have here are ready for youth involvement towards this very attractive waterfront focus of sailing, learning to swim, educational initiatives, and that sort of thing. we have work force development for small businesses, again harkening back to the economic issues i mentioned earlier. we have had a number oet