carpal tunnel syndrome the staff indication felt soil and come back do the site to take samples their preliminary guess is this could be 6 to 8 thousand years old the burial could be much younger it could be deferred sometime afternoon after the soil formation was created but the burial was probably one of the old even though in northern california. the second question it's possible there are other burials but i think this is isolateed.

with one possible expectation i shouldn't say the only one that's close is a bowler that was recovered down the street when they were building the arts station it was a woman who was yee very old. it appears that this burial our burial is a little bit older that was come to be known as bart woman >> we had a big problem on the mountain. >> we did that work as well. >> you had a lot of experience they used mounds one hundred and 6 years ago. >> the people that built those mounds came in later this is as

important as it is. >> sounds like you're doing fine. >> yes. we're preserving the past for the future it's interesting. the last item i want to report on we and turner attempted the february 27th partner center i know that director reiskin was there and mayor ed lee we wholeheartedly support the process so we'll be working with web core and engaging in the process what our trade various trades and will report on that later that concludes my report >> you've go on got one member of the public that wants to address. >> i think we're okay on. what do i think? >> very briefly and widening

the clock back an hour a couple of points open the financial specifically attachment to status of the contracts on attachment 4 which is expenses. on attachment 2 second line the downtown extension engineering this contract from last year this is the renewable of the 4 pointed $2 million contract the prop k funds no one is talking about the percentage i think this should go to the 1 million that the planning department is looking for as a study to the downtown extension in the i 280. moving to the capital and expenditures i hope you can find this useful once again the specialized services look at the

downtown it's $26 million we may have to scrape this so we need to move forward. on the revenue side there is an interesting line we're got a grant from the homeland security and of a hundred thousand dollars. the way i look at it, you know, there is a discount of $50 million of the b h s thinks is necessary and our map experts have come up with the recommendation is we invite dhs to come and look at it transbay and give us a second opinion and eventually decide how much we need to spend >> okay. this includes the

members of the public this is the - we can move into our regular calendar. item is to award the subcontract for 8 million plus for t g concrete super structure package and increasing the districts costs and increasing the authorized construction fee by 3 million 950 and authorized the sub garden insurance policy to 44.90. directors mark will report >> good morning mark with the program manager. we advertised the super

structure back in 2013 to basically complete the balance of the structural concrete work for the center which is the completion of the 10 foot wall for the sandbox. also the ground floor concrete slab and the other slab the bus deck and as well as the roof-deck there are 37 feet of concrete work. the bids were open february 11th and the estimate the budget it was approved in july of 35.5 million and it was updated to $33.3 million the estimate that we complete at the end of

february was $35 million. we had 5 pre-qualified biders consumer construction and other submitted bids at connecticut could. connecticut could informed us they were bidding other projects and couldn't submit bids they were busy and the csa can wanted to focus their attention on the bridge construction and not this type of work. this - this project had trans group had several deduct alternates they were approved as

a part of the july project alternate 4 was added later than. it had all the for $48.7 million they submitted a bid into through that and the bids are evaluated on the plus bids and the alternates. it's recommended that we accept the deduct alternates 13 and reject 4 it provides a structural architecture concrete finish number two, of providing a set of concrete the bid parts for this particular alternate is 64 hundred dollars and $3.4 million and this a

alternate is you much more than 64 million dollar and we ask you reject this and possibility discuss it with shimming any questions and is what caused the higher prices. it's solely recommended that the project be w5ur9d to show me any questions they've submitted a fair and reasonable bid. their bid taking a look at according to what we think the reduced costs or the costs savings with the mobiletion since they're on the dock side he construction of the below grounded concrete. the market code continues t conditions this is on a critical path and it's essentially, we you award it now for the schedule. we look at the scope of work the

concrete there's no opportunity for cost scope reduction. the total bid all the time is $48.4 million it's recommend to fund the budget between the amount and program revenues this is $22 million with the contingent of $8.2 million and $33 million for the allocation and $99.4 million for the contingent and 8.7 million and the balance will be 7 three or four $.4 million.

the group will be the first pathology awarded and the c mc agreed to have the payment bonds as the shourns program to address the subcontractors the subcontractor program has several benefits and increase the composition open the project. over the life of the program it's expected to save millions of dollars and if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them >> any questions. >> i have just some comments and then a question. first of all, i support the recommendations to move forward. i think it's on a critical path and even though that's a lot more money we need to move

forward. i think the recommendations is right like on the other packages the disparity between the engineer estimate and the c mc estimate is troubling are the philosophy is the bilateral and engineer are working together in the development of the xylophone to come to the end with the end results of estimates far apart is the collaborations are not working go. so that's concerning with the disparity of the bids so few bids and so different seems like it is cause for concern and it would be the quality of the bid documents and whether or not they're looking different things seems like the engineer and the contractor seem to be looking at

different things it's concerning and i say that because we have a lot more to be bid whatever it behind the disparities we want to understand. the last comment on the alternates i appreciate the amount it is hard to look at the numbers so as we are developing alternatives we may want to look at more substantive things. my question i think i saw in the staff report there were 4 addendum issued can you explain to us the purpose of the timing and the magnitude of those addendum. maybe that's contributed to the

results we've seen >> i don't have the information open the and i dim but it should include the inquires as part of the package. the other information i don't have but i'll share it later on >> randy do you have that informati information. >> again may be looking at the addendum what they have in them might be lessons for the future bids. >> if i can respond to a couple of your points on the s b e risks some have risks and this package doesn't. the risk by the engineer estimate was based on the speciality item and the market

conditions are so tight it will deplete the engineers opinion that is driving the costs that's not part of this package. on the alternates are not in the bidding in this panhandle but their future alternates. the alternates number one is the opening in the roof. the opening in the roof >>was for skylight in the future that is alternate to be deleted so that's really $250,000 on alternate futures. the only thing i can share this is a good bid. had we had 4 biders or more we could sharpen our pencils but this

this is a reflection of the economy. this is quite a bit work and there's quite a bit work out there >> i did you know, i have some questions on the moving from paid performance to this insurance. but i appreciate the quick response on this. i have talked about the executive director my only concerns is to make sure that someone reads through the performance bonds for our construction manager general contractor they expect the paid performance to continue downhill hill if this is a case if

someone reads through the funding agreement to make sure that all of the similitudes would be paying performance bonds i'm previously confident that that that's a good move given we do the research >> so we have a motion and second call the roll please. also the members of the public of the public and director metcalf. director reiskin. director harper that's 4 i's and item 7 is approved. that item 8 is the minutes of the february 24th meeting >> so moved. >> we have a motion and second. >> any members of the public. >> director lee. director reiskin. director harper. that's 4 i's and the minutes are

approved >> okay. then we're adjourned. >> that's concludes our