removal policy. >> who is doing this? >> and dale stein is here to present to you what we are proposing -- >> gale stein is here to present to you what we are proposing. >> ok. >> my presentation is not big. it is mostly in front of you. this is something that staff has been dealing with for a while. every six months or so, i would say that i get some requests from members of the public to ask to have transit shelters taken out. it tends to be a real clash. we have been working on this for a couple of years at this point and felt it was something we wanted to bring to the board to make a strong statement, that it is the mta policy to keep in shelters. we do have a procedure where we would consider problems to try to resolve that, but we think

this is a good balance on where it should be. >> based on hazards or problems for the disabled? >> exactly. we always work on that. >> ok. questions or comments? >> bob is the only person who has turned in a card. >> good afternoon. >> my name is bob. i am going to ask you to continue to think about amending or continuing this. the wording is vague in terms of how it might be looked at from the october hearing. another question, why are you dealing with a shelter removal policy? it is almost a bass ackwards approach. this specific scenario, this is a transfer point between two lines. apparently there is no specific priority for shelters with

transfer prices. so, that is something that i say is missing. even with regards to this policy, i pointed out at the access meeting that none of the language in the text was cited as a reason for the removal of the 39 and 91 bus stops. people said that there were shouting, drinking, and cursing. but nothing in the language here would have justified that removal. in addition, the hearing officer then made a recommendation that i verified as impossible to fulfill. he said that because there was a communication facility for the blind at these shelters, there should be a kiosk put up so that the blind could know when the buses coming. there is not any kind of technology or facility like that. no vendor at a bus shelter would pay for it.

it is irrelevant and not able to be fulfilled. you should not pass this. it is incomplete and it is bass ackwards. a transfer point where there ought not to be one is just wrong. >> would anyone else like to address the board at this time? welcome back. >> two points on this. sorry i have not read the proposed policy, but some of that bus shelters in particular do not have the next bus schedule. i would be interested in of what exceptions to the rule might be appropriate. that all of those shelters ought to have the best information in them. as to this proposed policy itself, i do not know if it has been reviewed by the citizens advisory council.

were there comments incorporated into it? -- their comments incorporated into it? >> [inaudible] >> i think that it is important to do that, when they come up. >> any other questions or comments? is there a motion? >> move to approve. >> second. >> those in favor? >> aye. >> those opposed? >> no. >> 5-1 democrats five-one. >> next item? >> authorizing the director of transportation to execute an agreement with parsons brinkerhoof to develop the sf -- sfmta real-estate and facilities vision for the 21st century and provide as needed services, at a

cost not to exceed $1,060,000 in for a term of five years. >> good morning. i am with the financing information technology division. the mta has significant needs to upgrade its operation in order to meet the growth in demand that transportation will receive in the growing decade. given the wide range of functions under the mta's jurisdiction, the agency must address the current and future needs of these various areas, including transit vehicles, enforcement vehicles, maintenance shops, operations centers, and administrative offices. this information is critical for internal purposes and communicating to our various stakeholders what is required for the agency to provide services now and into the future for the next decade. our current facilities are spread out all over san

francisco, ranging in age from more than one century, such as the overhead, 1893 lines for the muni, to a few years old, like the muni metro yard, which was built in 2008. after 24 years of land acquisition, planning, design, and funding challenges. under the jurisdiction of mta and under least prostitute -- properties, including transit enforcement for shops and accessible plans with non- revenue vehicles and towed cars. we have consolidated our administrative offices into six floors on one avenue. in review of our supply and demand, we estimated that it might take up to 40 acres to

accommodate all of these needs, of which approximately 31.35 acres still need to be identified. the major drivers, now and in the future, are the transit needs for approximately 17.3 acres, 43% of the new demand, and for towed and impounded vehicles, which is about 14 acres or 35% of the demand. it is located under the five- year mou support plan as the developer for the future of this property. mta needs to move off of it. we continue to seek and actively pursue opportunities to improve facilities. including this creek facility. the central subway project, we are proud to report, on -- as of

january 10, we are now the owner of the chinatown transportation site. we are under a leasing option to purchase bancroft avenue. our transportation management center is across the street from our administrative headquarters, the agency determined its need a professional services on this side, for real estate, in the 21st century. we issued an rfp in 2011. three of the more qualified. of the agreement was not to exceed a set amount in five years -- qualified.

the agreement was not to exceed a set amount for five years i would be happy to enter any questions -- five years. i would be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions? >> we have heard significant input from the key -- from the community, where you are. -- community on where you are. i would like to emphasize that it is urgent that there are some members of the community that view this as urgent, the findings in this report. i understand that whatever the recommendation comes from, it will probably be based on what is sounded out entirely throughout the system. you can perform, or begin have this performed.

i want to reiterate the sense of urgency. i get calls on this every month about where the report is, and just coming to this contract now is a little disappointing. i assume that you did everything you needed to do. i do want to emphasize that there are people who are barely anxious to see some kind of change, or at least some findings and an opportunity to take action, one way or the other, on that particular site. if there is any way to expedite that, i wanted to reiterate the conveyance of what i hear regularly from the constituents that we represent on that plan. needless to say, speaking on behalf of those constituents, we are anxious to see this movement along and grateful that we have come this far. -- moved along and grateful that

we have come this far. >> i will echoed that the upper yard has been discussed for quite some time. as well as the need -- >> my question is really examining the overall benefit or detriment of those barrages to our financial and operational success. i know that providing parking is important. it is a part of what we do. but we cannot assume that a parking garage is the right spate -- the right use for a space that we have. i think it would be interesting to see an overall cost-benefit

analysis. maybe they are not in the right occasion to be turned into leases for vehicles, but they could partially returned into -- be turned into an overall analysis on the garages --that e serve. thank you. >> anyone else? >> i just wanted to express opposition to this proposed contract. we have a significant number of staff in the real-estate unit and have traffic and parking

under one roof. they should have and should be looking throughout the agency for real estate needs. this is work that existing or augmented that it do. i am sure that the proposed contractor rates are significant on an hourly basis and would be less if done by city employees. >> anyone else care to reverse the award? >> is there a second? >> all in favor. we are unanimous. we need to move to a closed session now? >> while waiting for the people's plan people to a work -- to arrive, looks like you could go into closed session.

let's look like they are here. >> oh, they are here now. all right. >> ok. we will go to item number 11. presentation and discussion regarding what the people's plan for the america's cup. >> i will quickly handle as a member of a three-person executive steering committee. it has been an incredible effort. a lot of different city and outside staff have gotten to this point of where we are in the process. i know that where we are, from my vantage point and there is, the work, coming into the mta,

and the people's plan has been phenomenal. there is no way that this will work without good transportation and affecting of that plan. working closely with a whole lot of other folks. we are in a good position to showcase what we can do in this event that is important for the city. with that, we have another speaker. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentleman. let's i am just checking to make sure that we have the slides.

>> -- >> i am just checking to make sure that we have the slides. >> [inaudible] >> i can do another one. i should probably introduce myself. my name is mike martin. this plan has been greatly supported amidst many ends -- instances. my piece is going to be starting out with an informational overview of where we are in the process. this is a very determinative time in terms of how we move forward and what events will

look like in san francisco. we have completed it. this slide shows us the schedule of the america's cup events. basically, we're looking at the main events of the 2013 but to then select the challenger, that would be september 7 to, but that is a 509 match series. leading up to 2013 with a series of regtattas around the world,

with at the same team, but smaller vessels. in 2015 they will all be in 72 foot vessels. i think that the america's cup world series is giving ourselves a chance to get a snapshot of what this new brand of close to shore, fixed brand, a multimult pricing on how we will manage this exciting event in 2012 and 2013. these programs are slated for august 27, through september 2. those will be focused on the northern waterfront. the port facilities will still be under construction. the center of activity will be the marina green. so? >> to help to give some

contacts? >> yes. all these sort of it -- organizations have america's cup in their name, which can be confusing. racing and management are basically sister organizations who are together. the event's sponsor put on the unit, the authority handles the commercialization. they are, rarely focused with on the water logistics'. -- primarily focused and bringing into focus there event plans and bringing them together with our of and planning, so hopefully we have a successful strategy.

lastly, the locally formed committee that is locally formed with san francisco citizens, who are leading the way, and are a key pillar of the agreement, relating to fund-raising to defer a portion of the public costs. they are also going to help to convene not much of our stability. we are very grateful for that presentation. however, raise management being intricately involved in the planning is part of a better partner as well. >> next slide, please. >> we issue our environmental impact report on july 11 of last year. august 5 was the freezing of the

public comment period. we had a thorough and exhaustive effort to respond to those comments. the planning commission heard the item and certify that it is clean and the appeal has now been calendar for the full board of supervisors next tuesday, january 24. i hope we will come back to the mta board of directors to adopt ceqa findings and take appropriate findings -- action. at the bottom of the slide we referenced the process under nepa. that includes the regulation for the coast guard to manage

traffic along the bay as well as these permits to use park lands and that process is moving forward. it will take longer to publish their documentary different departments. you'll see that later this spring in may 2012 and hopefully a final findings in june 2012. a quick few points on the economic benefits. the economic study commission prior to signing the host agreement looked at the full range of economic potential impacts to san francisco and the bay area and called out over $1 billion of impact and over 8000 jobs created by the events. these impacts and jobs are spread across a number of sectors as listed here. construction, transportation, and general events. hospitality and that sort of thing. something we have pointed out to

people as we talked about these economic impact is they are not coming from a single point. these impacts are from diffuse points and different spectators and people interested in the events come to san francisco. our strategy is not if you build it they will come, but also how to recapitalize on people and those dollars coming into the bay area? to bring them into san francisco and show them what san francisco is about. we see this as the key legacy. keeping people coming back and use this as a springboard to reintroduce our cells to the world on a stage that is unparalleled except for other events like the olympics or the world cup. this is a depiction of the proposed raising area. in 2012 the america's cup and other events are using smaller versions of the vessels. based on that, based on the speed of the vessels and the

links they would like to have these races extent, they have shrunk down this area. you may have seen earlier diagrams that have a dotted line going into richardson bay going up toward into island. with the maneuverability of the boats and the desire to bring them close to spectators on shore for the first time, they need a smaller area. this has provided benefits to our planning process including as you will see leading a channel to the northern end of the golden gate bridge for traffic to continue even during the race time and this was vital to the coast guard and other maritime stakeholders and other transportation opportunities to make sure we do not close this pork for this event but rather they can coexist in commerce and the special side-by-side. moving to the next slide this is the proposed race area. this is a larger potential area.

however it continues to leave the northern shipping channel. also some areas that are hard to see. places that are expected to have a lot of spectators vessels interested in watching the race. the coast guard has been working with those stakeholders to manage traffic. >> we will take you through a couple of the key venues for the events in 2012 as a mansion. the venues will be under construction. it will include things like the international broadcast and media center. it will include a hospitality not only for corporate sponsors and other event gas but also food and drink and other

services for the general public. we are continuing to work to plan these ion -- with different regulatory agencies and we will take these to recreation and park commission as well. this has -- is what has been refined and there is an event staged here. it is not clear if there is special events are after-hours entertainment. the authority is working on its plans but we're making sure we are ready operationally and able to approach it in a way that avoids too many impacts to the park and the area. in 2013, the center of a bent attention will be pier 27 and pier 29. this is the side of the new cruise terminal -- site of the new cruise terminal. that building their, the idea is the city would construct the core and shelled the building

and handed over to the event authority to make it a corporate hospitality center and other services relating to the america's cup village. this would open to the public. -- be open to the public. this would have events related programming and some entertainment or arts programming and we're working with the authority to develop that piece of the plan. in addition, this will be a hub of interest along that beautiful stretch of the embarcadero. we're working hard to make sure the different modes of transport in this area are appropriately reconciled for safety and also for ease of transportation issues. we will get into more of that later. i think the final kia bin location is pier 30 and pier 32. south of the bay bridge. this is the location they will do structural out -- operates --

upgrades. what they found is this is a real attraction for people to see behind the scenes. basically you can see all the work that makes this possible. this will be under construction. just south of this diagram is the war for which is part of the open space project that was on the books that we will try to bring forward and create another viewing area for this exciting piece of the event activities. this next slide shows a number of implementation plans. the city's obligation to get this event moving forward really centered around a couple of key pillars. the first was to move a ceqa

document or environmental review document through the process within a compressed time frame over the past year and i in parallel with that process, what the host menu called for was a series of implementation plans so there is 11 plans listed here. nine of these call for the agreement and by delivering on those and delivering on the environmental review document, we are able to construct a picture of how we are implementing these events. they have been effective and helpful as we get people to understand what it means to bring the america's cup to san francisco. to walk through these quickly, the advertising and ambush marketing plans are- -- we are working with the authority to spread their message but to make sure their copyrights and trademarks are protected, honoring the agreement between partners. there are a number of these plansha