strategic placement of trees to create a comfortable climate because as many of you know, it can be when the and we have to plan for that. the first room on the left is a hard scape room with a grove of trees, cafe, and statue for public meeting point. the second room is a recreation place for families to congregate, a relocated jr. giants baseball field, volleyball, cafes and a place we think will be activated on the weekends after work and be a great place to hang out. the third room is the great lawn and that's big enough for festivals and concerts with more than 5000 people. you can fly kites there and have lots of different public

activities and festivals. the park is flanked by a debt to just behind the baseball field where we exit -- we expect to have kayak and pikes and access to water. there is a kayak launch just behind where the kayak sales and rental places located at pier 48. this slide shows a couple of presidents. this is in madison square park in new york and is extraordinarily popular. the second slide to the right is pink very and you see the warming hut down to the right. another public space where people are dying. one of the things we want to do

is create an active space so it does not feel windswept and then use of feels like a destination, safe and welcoming to our families. the park has a meandering path way. it is not atypical linear pathway but meant to highlight those views of the bridge and has seeing interspersed and weaves in and now where birds and other animals can congregate and it can be helpful with the sustainability plan. pier 48. we envision a rehabilitated pier 48 mates are truly sound by new apron, a spruced up look, backlit and clothing at night. this slide shows some of the uses of pier 48 in the type of paper and we could have at pier

48 which would be good for dining. it can be used not only for potential brass rod and museums, but an event center, expositions for food, wine, furniture, regional trade shows and we also envision possible manufacturing uses. mission rock square is in the heart of the project. there is a circle that shows you where we are looking at. since our previous proposal, we moved it north. its about 1.5 acres in size and its inspired by the great urban plazas and public squares around the world.

levi's plaza, jackson square and washington square. the northern side of the park and southern side of the park -- this is a pathway where people can walk directly into the park itself and create a better park experience. the park is surrounded by retail, dining, outdoor lounge areas and is perfect for events. it will have a festival environment on game days and be a great place to be. it also maintains a visual court or as it cuts through the park and leads to the water's edge. the project has retail, 125,000 square feet of retail. this graphic shows where those places are likely to be. they are concentrated around the parks and the interior street.

there is some retail but most of it is concentrated on the street that leads from the parking structure to the ballpark. the likely foot patterns and traffic patterns of the patrons. on that street, we envision it being closed on game days and take on a festival environment. we also want to have a retail mix that is unique and different from other retail experiences we have encountered. we want it to be homegrown and authentic so when people think of coming here, they think of coming to a place not like any other place but is a special environment where they would enjoy hanging out, a lingering, finding stores at the opportunities you might not find everywhere else. in fact, being more like a neighborhood street commercial district in san francisco that

at all. -- then that the mall. one of the other principles is to create flexible mix of uses. how much square feet of office and how much residential units will be built depends on the market. if we prescribe those uses now to give ourselves of flexibility, changes in the market condition could stall the project and so what you see before you are three different variations of mixes of uses. the brown and yellow be in residential. the first mix is 1.7 million square feet of office and 650 residential units. residential units are animated by water units and park frontage and the water use is animated

by mission rock square and the seven building sites to the south. the second iteration, we march housing down and have a corporate campus office environment and introduce housing as well. this is a balanced housing approach with a thousand units. another variant on the office populated version is to move some of the housing opposite the mission square park and some of the office of the china bay park to create more diversity around the public open spaces. our philosophy here is we go for an entitlement that allows us to switch usage on some of the parcels. some will be housing danceable

presidential and some will be swing parcels. office space -- we talked a little bit about it. it is ideally situated for a corporate campus or at for high- tech firms looking for an expanded san francisco presence or silicon valley firms looking for any successful san francisco operation. it's animated by the public square. we envision 700 -- 7200 jobs with about 10,000 offsite jobs created by the fact these offices are located here. we envision a young work force more likely to take public transit, bike, and populate the retail establishments after work. with respect to residential, this is a great site for residential. the demand is strong, they're

great water and bridge views and it has an active, vibrant, compelling street life below. connections to transit are strong, enabling people to live here and commute to the peninsula by train or by car into downtown by muni and the rest of the bay area by bart. this is a great location to live and work. there's a parking structure on the side that accommodates approximately 2000 cars. it's designed to be shared parking resources, not building separate parking perce but a parking resources that everyone will share together and will operate in a pioneering fashion through pricing and incentives. we will have people park their for retail use and that would turn and the use by ballpark patrons.

this would reduce the subsidy needed and reduce the number of spaces we need to build in terms of parking, which is everyone's goal. finally, we are very excited -- this is a destination we think the city will embrace and love. we can get visibility to this when 750,000 people watched the games and we highlight different restaurants and housing opportunities and parks experiences that exist. we think we can make this a destination people will know about all over the world. it also will produce compelling economics. we are negotiating economics right now so i'm not getting into those. will have plenty of time to talk about economics this fall, but the projected cost for the

development of this project is $1.6 billion. that produces approximately $1.6 billion in tax increment over the life of the project which will be available to be used, most of which will be available to the use of sight on port and city credit projects as was envisioned when this rfp was first issued. we look forward to taking this journey with you. we have been on this journey for a while. everett not a bad economic cycle and we're glad we're back in the economy is suggesting we can move forward and get buildings in the ground. i think with that, i will stop. i will be available to answer questions and if you have specific questions, we look forward to working with you. >> thank you very much. any public comment?

commissioners? >> a very exciting. thank you. looking forward to seeing the various iterations. i think i can speak for everyone who appreciates all the work you have put in in terms of meeting with the community and working with the port as well. thank you. >> what do you do with a parking during day games? >> that will be our biggest challenge. we have up to 12 weekday day games a year and we have limited parking resources. most of the people who drive to games park with a 15 or 20 minute walk. we have space for about 3200 cars and a typical game will attract as many as 9000 cars. we are trying to take care of

our partners, but those games are during the day and retail uses are competing for those spaces and those are the challenges we will deal with in terms of pricing. we will have to survey the neighborhood and look at other options for parking so we can satisfy the demand we have. those day games will be the biggest challenges. >> the residential units. will they be rentals or condos? >> their plan to be rental. with the legislation, there is a ground lease term possible on this site and the market is suggesting to us that rental is more practical and realistic than macondo because of the life of the crown leased.

we're still talking with support staff about this issue. we may have additional ideas when we go. right now, they're all rental units. >> going back to transportation in terms of transit needs, i know they will be the third street rail, is there another transit plan that would service the site? >> we have the mission rock stopped. cal train is about two blocks away and not much further to this site than the ballpark and we have a large readership. we have ferry service for the site, water taxi and there has been talk of a high-speed rail in this location. it's a pretty well served by public transit and links and to other transit resources. this will be a convenient place

to live for people who want to get around without using their car. it's near the 280 off ramp, so if you are trying to go south, that's appealing to companies located in silicon valley, there is good access to this site. >> this is a very exciting project and time for the port. i look forward to discussing the financials because the whole pitch will be great. i have one question for phil. you stated five benchmarks have been reached and 7 are to be completed. the exhibit says there are six more to be completed. i'm wondering if one has are hasn't been completed. >> i think i did it leave off

benchmark no. 1. we are at 6. >> the plan has been submitted? can you briefly describe it? >> sure. the community outreach program will be a continuation of work we have done and even recently to reach out to stakeholders to the concepts we are exploded -- exploring to the revised proposal. we are already starting to do that with the advisory group and mission bay and we are discussing the successor group --] is on hiatus and we are looking on how to explore that going forward. there are state agencies and regulatory bodies that we will

be reaching out to as well. >> will you be reaching out to put her of europe -- to put perot hill? >> absolutely. that's important contingent for this project and if you look through the revised proposal, you can see the project views acknowledging its a big issue to address. >> thank you. >> i would echo everything we have heard. it's important to embark on this but it is a brand new neighborhood for the city. my question is related to the development schedule. it will be dependent upon getting any anchor tenants into the office buildings? not necessarily taking over the entire building but how is it going to affect your development and construction schedule? >> we will not build expect

office buildings. we will build them when we have a certain percentage leased out. to the extent we have anchor tenants, we will move quickly. to the extent we don't, we will move as demand is created. it's one of the reasons we want flexibility with respect to the housing news so if we're finding resistance in one market, we can look at the other to push the development forward. the plan is to build out the project as the demand exists for the space. we are actively talking to tenants now and there's a lot of interest in this site given its location and drama. this is really a great site. phil williamson and i were just in boston where mit's real- estate graduate school program hosted an international competition on a particularly interesting development site. which side did they choose?

they chose this site. people came from europe, canada, hong kong and across the united states to talk about how exciting this site is. we think we have the requisite interest and recovering economy where we feel like we can move quickly on this project, but we are speaking to people who could be anchor tenants and occupy more than a few buildings so we have a great jump-start. we are doing all this at the same time and working with the mayor's office and others to locate and speak to businesses we think are good candidates. >> could you amplify a little bit on the different scenarios for warehousing would be located or go into more detail about some of the factors that would determine which approach might be taken? >> some of the buildings have

larger for plates and are more amenable to the office products and there are some sites that have more height potential that might be amenable for housing projects. there are also -- there is the proximity to the low water, you scale down and height as you move toward the water's edge and that suggests what type of these could go into that building. let me see if i can back this up. i don't know if you see it on your monitor. this is a housing-office approach. the housing is along the water's edge and steps down toward the water. we wanted to create a campus-

like setting around the square that would be amenable for the office project. that is what you see maintained here. it makes sense for the house a and the bridge views and we think those will be compelling units for people to live in. as we thought about it, we thought it made sense to go down francois boulevard which feels more like a commercial corridor more compatible with office. that is why we visualize it this way. >> that is preferred? >> it is not necessarily our preferred. office is a better share of parking resources because each office has an associated now of parking with it. most people -- a lot of people

have cars that go along with housing unit. that would require their to be more parking than the office use would require. we also like the mixed use aspect of having a project with good balance between housing and office. we're looking at the different options and will be considering what the market suggests the best return will be and the speed in terms of getting the project done. >> what is the configuration in terms of the size of units? >> that's a good question. we have not gone into specifics about how many three-bedroom units, a two-bedroom units, one- bedroom units, we have just given a range of six entered 52,000. we know there will be a public

interest in having diversity in the housing stock so we will need to balance those interest with the economics of the development of the retail. >> it seems you will get younger people in transition looking for long term. >> probably so. also empty nesters and people who want to move back to the city. we think we're going to have to have offerings. >> you may want days it car center in your parking garage. -- have a zipcar center at. >> we have seen cars that smashed together -- this whole area is evolving as the world is getting greener and more creative. >> with the office building, if there are large enough anchor tenant, will they be able to do

corporate with those buildings or with someone have a so and so company building? >> one of the appeals to locating here is they will have the sign of their enterprise on the building, especially given a visibility of the ballpark. that will be important to some central tenants and this is an issue that will have to work out with the community and stakeholders. but i suspect an anchor tenant will want to have a visual presence to say that we are here. >> to continue with housing, the affordability component, will there be a percentage of affordable units are how're you going to address that? >> we have had conversations

about the issue of affordable housing, whether it is to pay a fee in lieu of other affordable housing projects that don't have the finances to get done or whether they have inclusion rehousing. i don't know if we are prepared to say what the outcome will be. i think we know what the preferences at the moment. there's a lot of interest in generating some revenue to get affordable housing that has been stalled built. we will take the guidance of the city on this issue. >> there is about a 9000 unit housing stock that has not been addressed from a capital equity standpoint. the city the former administration both has a preference today for being out. not a social preference, just that they do not have the money to build the housing stock that

have. we're in the middle of the ongoing conversation -- positive conversation -- but the city needs to find the right path, working with the port to establish their affordable housing policy as well. >> any more questions? otherwise, thank you. we booked for 2 updates as we go forward. >>item 10a. informational presentation on the port's 5-year financial plan, fiscal year 2012/13 fiscal year 2016/17. >> good afternoon, commissioners. deputy director of the ministration and finance. i am going to go ahead and put the power point on

>> the reason i'm here this afternoon is to give you all a high level summary of the port's budget projections so that you can guide financial decisions over the next five-year term. consistent with proposition a, which the voters approved on november 3, 2009, the city and county now prepares a five-year financial forecast on every of fiscal year. is it prepared its first plan last year. this is an even year, so the city is now preparing an updated financial forecast, but i wanted to bring you what it looks like with an update, given the changes we have had with the america's cup agreement, the

recent c.o.p. decision, etc. i thought it would be helpful to see an update today. the plan we produced last year, as you may recall, had trends verisimilitude the city general fund overall with revenues growing at its lower rate than operating expenditures, unfortunately. 3% on the revenue side on average, 4% with operating expenditures. this resulted in two problems. operating budget deficits that we were facing to avoid blowing into a fund balance and declining resources for the capital budget. as you may recall, this last plan ended the projected period where the capital budget is as low as $8.3 million. the revised financial forecast

actually reflects much of the same trends we saw in the last update. we have growing operating expenditures that are similar in size. we also see budget deficits in the same year, years three through five, and declining capital resources allocated -- allocated to capital. the prior forecast ended with 8.3. this projection ends with $8.6 million. we see those similar trends in the forecast. this forecast does show some changes, notably, much improved revenue projections. we also see within the forecast we have met many substantial one-time needs associated with the america's cup project, we have been able to support our c.o.p.