. >> director metcalf. >> thank you for the presentation. chair, person, kim, i think that we need to take a moment to triage on this agenda. we are looking at a $214 million cost over run, so far on the project. we have heard an indepth part of 25 percent of this problem. i don't know if this board is going to try to go item by item to second guess or push back on this or if we are going to just accept the 56.8 rda cost ad dish or whatever the number is and say that we have to focus elsewhere. we have to we have on the agenda to understand the rest of the cost over runs and what we are going to do about it or whether we are doing value engineering or talking about new revenue and also have the cal tran extension and it does not seem, we have a few other things. it does not seem like we can do all of this, i would propose that we think about triaging the agenda. >> do you have a motion director metcalf? >> i am not sure what to put off or what to focus on. but i would move that we... i don't think that we can do all of this with the... i hav

>> director metcalf. these recommendation make sense to me. i want to ask would you be going back to the design of the structural system, not between the subs? >> there are certain designs on specification changes. the structural engineer are part of these meetings. >> okay. >> okay. so seeing no further questions or comments, i think there is a general consthaensz consensus that we can move forward. i would like to take public comment on this item. >> thanks again for the opportunity. the first thing i would like to touch on is increasing the size of the pool. in case you have not heard europe is under going a recession right now. the industry is hurting really hard. there is lots of people that would be able to help you out. scan ska is extremely successful as it should be. i'm going back to s t a p. it goes like this. last was discounted as an option due to the weight of the glass. it should result in a strangulated. the contractor was deeming a light weight solution because of the terms of these construction. what is that bias, basically w

we are also, i want to director director metcalf's comment. we are not in terms of phase two, it is only about ten million dollars or so, that we are looking at accelerating in it and maybe a ten million zlars and that is only if we don't get that grant. if we don't get the tiger grants and so for every dollar, we don't get in federal funding and we are not made the number one priority for the city, we have no choice but to go to another revenue source and i have to add that while what is included here from phase two does not effect the new starts pot. but we wanted to finish that presentation. this presentation because i think that it answers your questions, director metcalf. in terms of what or i mean what else can we cut? it answers, what we are looking for in terms of additional revenue and we have a plan to first and foremost go to our pot. that does not compete with anybody else. that is our property sales. and so, if you can allow us to juflt finish we are almost done. and we will answer and at the next board member i will certainly bri

. >> metcalf? >> present >> director reiskin? >> present. >> ortiz? >> present. >> and kim? >> here. >> and you do have a quorum. >> there are any communications today from board members? any new or old business. >> i did want to know that the special meeting for march 25th in this hearing room. >> thank you. >> seeing none, let's move on to the executive director's report. >> good morning, directors and members of the public. i wanted to begin by dedicating our bimbo, rain heart and she passed away on march sixth. we knew her for 15 years and she was a friend and a constant supporter and a valuable asset to the state and she was a native to india and had 25 years of experience with the california department of transportation, and shewise a member of the review committee overseeing the bay bridge project and looking for ward to the ribbon cutting ceremony this year, she was one of the very few women in the directors in the industry and i know that she will be missed by all of us, i would like to express our condolences to the family and friends. on behave of the transbay. >>

director metcalf? >> sorry. >> just, my apologies, i am going to have to go at noon. so i want to just cut to the chase, while i really appreciate you taking time to be here and i know that you have a big company to run in addition to this project. we are looking at 214 million dollar cost over run so far. minus 50 million in new revenue that has been found, 164 million to figure out, i assume the costs are going to continue to go up. we have heard at length this the team does not believe that we should do cost cutting from safety, we have got a 17 million dollar saving on the facade that we will hear about later in your professional judgment where should we be looking to reduce the cost of this project? >> the entire project? the thing that we have to really keep in mind is time. and schedule. we are now in a escalation area, environment and these construction cycle and to back up too far to redesign needs to be studied heavily and there are things that can be done and that was the last part of the recommendation is that we need to look at deeper in the bids to under

the wtf-ness of metcalf gets more wtfy.aid we'll never allow the left to benefit from the wicked acts of murders to enhance their gun grabbing agenda. but he seems perfectly allowing mass murderers to amass their gun agendas and when they have a gun it often results in mass murders. wtf, pennsylvania. our nation was founded in you're fine state. you're a great state. you produced rocky and fired rick santorum. philadelphia was where our constitution was form. now mr. metcalf wants to pass an unconstitutional law. >> john: welcome back to "viewpoint." we asked our viewers to comment via twitter or facebook on the sequester, and john scott g posted this on my facebook page. the democrats are to blame for thinking that sanity and common sense would prevail in congress. i agree john scott that was pretty insane thing for democrats to think. that's like expecting the joker to be let out of arkham asylum for good behavior, and yes in answer to your question i'm a geek with no life. if you have a comment for the show, tweet us at

. >> director, metcalf. >> director metcalf, thank you for the great presentation. bob, sorry i should know this, wlaets the what's the source of repayment for the loan? >> tax increment from the redevelopment areas. >> okay. the thing i think we need to be careful of is not robbing from phase 2 in order to pay for phase 1. whenever there is a flexible funding source that we think could be to phase 2 and use for phase 1, decrease the likelihood of getting the dtx done. of the revenue sources you have laid out i'm unclear of where you fall into that category. we have to be careful. taking from phase 2, although you say it's a small amount, $10 million, is that already for the first phase? >> that was programmed out in fiscal year 34. it's unlikely available for phase 2 as well. >> okay. that's a relative small amount. the tiffa loan? >> there are two components to the tiff a -- loan. when we entered into agreement with the department of transportation, the interest rate was locked in at a rate that we thought at that time was very attractive rate for the p g a, but a

longer we put that off the more expensive this project becomes and it defeats everything that director metcalf is looking to do which is save money. the seconds thing that we are going to come back to you on march 25th. was a recommendation on what to do further with skanka, do we ask the board to allow us to negotiate further? reject the bid? and they will have a recommendation for you then, we are not coming to the board on march 25th, with the recommendation to adopt the reserves and contingencies we can at this point because we need to give web corps times to relook at the whole structural steel, do we repackage everything? do we redesign the steel in some way to be able to give the response that you asked for. so march 25th, would be allowing us to move so that the design team could finish and that would just include the direction on the rva and the direction of what to move forward and that is it for march 25th and changing the facade from the grass to the metal and we can do that presentation as well. i would ask the board to consider maybe starting our meetings at 9:00, we have a very

. >> metcalf. naye. >> reiskin. >> aye. >> ortiz. >> aye. >> kim aye as well. >> that is 12 ayes. and item is amoved. and we will move on to the next item. >> approving the minutes of the february 14, 2013, meeting and no members of the public have indicated that they want to address you on this item. >> go ahead. >> so we have a motion from director lloyd, to approve and a second, the first and the second, director lloyd. >> aye. >> metcalf? >> aye. >> reiskin. >> aye. >> ortiz. >> aye. >> kim. >> aye. >> that is five ayes and the minutes ar proved. >> thank you, >> at this time, we will move on to item 14, which is a continuation of the presentation of the proposed revision to the phase one base line budget for the transbay, this is continuation from last month, where we actually just ran of time and not able to complete this item and just no a note of information, we did have another item last month agenda that was on the dtx presentation. and high speed rail electrification and that is continued to april. >> bob will present on this item and members of the team. we listened ca

was going up over time and we ended up with something quite a bit above and i think to director metcalf's question what does that mean for the glazing and the other big packages and the other big packages that you referenced are still to come? i guess that it is more than a third and we have big ones that are further out in time and subject to further escalation and out for one of those packages and i am wondering what comfort level that we should on the estimates now and what we are seeing for at least this one, just the recommendations to cover at the next meeting. >> that is helpful, director could you repeat the first one? because i did not quite catch the first one on the order and the change of the process? >> like to understand what the program's change process is. so how we get to the point where we are needing to authorize additional design budget. >> how we move from one? >> where internally how those decisions are being made to advance to the board? >> okay. >> and we do have a change management, budget change management procedure, that documents exactly how that is done, and t

metcalf present, reiskin, kim present as well. madam chair you do have a quorum? >> thank you, is there any new business? seeing none we move on to the directors report. >> good morning everyone. we have a full agenda today. i'm going to report on one item, preparatory school in palo alto shadowing us and they are from grades 6-12. all of these students graduate and go to college. i want to thank you for attending. that concludes my report. >> thank you. at this time we'll move to item # 6, which is a public comment. >> we don't have anyone who wishes to comment on this item. thank you, patrick from san francisco. i know you are looking for areas to save money, i think you can save money in position decisions which include buildings that is right going to attach to the dooept. a policy decision that could be made easily. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. part patrick. any other m members for public comment? thank you no comment. item is closed. next comment? item? >> update and vulnerability assessment in the construction document. >> directors will be part o

c o oavment bob electric sway and president and c o e dennis callahan and executive director dave metcalf, e c a karen inc.,el and inner city advisers jose conia and typely going to have to forgive me if i miss some of you and so you can send me another or someone else will help me when they get up here and so welcome to the public officials in the room. supervisor carmen chu and scott wiener and supervisor eight district san francisco monique myoand executive director port of the san francisco and general forerodney phoning, president of s f planning commission and, from the city of oakland. deana santana city mr., fred blab below assistant city administrator robert bert bra burn director on the board and councilmember knoll gallow district five. city attorney, barbara parker, debra ally smith director port of oakland so we have our two port directors in the room which, is wonderful and if i miss someone please forgive me or come up and harass me about it latter. we had a. q. year at the business times, i'll say in 2012 and everything is up, print six declaration, web audience one .2 mil

. >> i guess that i have a couple and i think that generally, i would agree with director metcalf that it is not a question of whether this board wants this to be a safe and secure facility. but i think that there is a question, as the last speaker was coming out and trying to answer the question of how to buy-down risk and i think that there is another question of at what cost and i don't think that we have seen anything quantitative here in terms, i mean that there is risk benefit, analysis, that has to go into seismic safety decisions to hazmat safety decision to all of these. but that is something that we have not gotten any sense of, and i would ask the question last time and i don't think that i heard or understand an answer of we are talking about something like 64 million dollars of additional cost, but i presume that the original design did not include zero considerations for safety. so it would still be helpful to know what the total cost is at 64 plus what? and then, i guess one other question at this point, related to the chair's question is, how and when and why was the po

>> director metcalf? >> i got it. >> dr. reiskin? >> i had a couple of questions. >> sure. >> one of them, so in 2010, we got $400 million to build the box, and we increased the budget by exactly that amount and it looks like... >> yes. >> and at the same time there were 100 million savings of ve and some shift of scope from phase two to phase one and there were energy efficiency additions to the scope. there was whatever came i guess from the architectal vision that was incorporated. so did everything else just wash out exactly and that is why the increase to the budget reflected just the $400 million of the grant? >> yeah, just the $400 million of the grant application was developed in conjunction with looking at all of these other moving components of the estimate. >> so it is not just the cost of the box per se, then? the $400 million grant was looking at the cost of the box in terms of the hard cost and the design cost and the construction management and it extended our construction schedule by two and a half years, they were bo

>> metcalf. present. >> ortiz. >> present. >> kim. >> sartipi. >> kim >> here. >> and are there any communications. >> not that i am aware of. >> any new or old business from the brord of directors, seeing none we will move on to the executive director's report. >> good morning, everyone, first i want to have good news, all three butress have been poured and i want to thank everyone who has worked six days, you know, a week, nights and weekends and all sorts of inclement weather. all floors are done, secondly i want to acknowledge and thank the carpenters for highlighting us in the january edition of the magazine. they have a really nice article in there about the transbay project and the importance of labor in their continued support to our project over many years, thank you very much for acknowledging us and the magazine. and in addition, board members, i did sign out a letter from anvill builders as you may recall. it is a company that we awarded a contract to in november of last year for 9, 2

. >> reporter: that was urban planner gabe metcalf summing up one of the biggest building booms san francisco in decades with 26 high-rises going up along the downtown corridor alone and at a speed that would have been both politically and economically unthinkable ten years ago. >> there are alway ups and downs. >> reporter: there are 4,000 new apartments going up plus 1.5 million square feet of office space. and there's another two to three thousand apartments in the pipeline, plus one to two million more square feet of office space, as well. >> the buildings we're seeing are 20 to 30 stories. >> reporter: and let's not forget the new transbay terminal project going up on this block which, when it's done, something going to be taller than the transamerica or the bank of america towers. all were approved years ago, but it wasn't until last year that the money and concrete started pouring in and making them a reality. >> it's the result of all that work and planning for that growth and that investor confidence catching up. >> reporter: let's not another get plans for a waterfront warriors aren