tv Government Access Programming SFGTV February 19, 2019 8:00pm-9:01pm PST
for the record, this is the fen 19th, 2019 treasure island development authority infrastructure and transportation committee meeting. item number 1, call to order and roll call. director richardson. >> here. >> director sein? >> here. >> director? we have a quorum. item number 2, general public comment. allow members of the public to address matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of the committee. and does not appear on today's agenda. in addition to general public comment, public comment will be held during each item on the agenda. members of the public may the committee for up to three
minutes. please state your name and the organization if you're he want -- representing. >> i wanted to do some opportunity to welcome all of you. i know that a lot of people are watching, remotely, so welcome to the treasure island infrastructure and transportation committee. are there any public comments on items not on the agenda? i see none. >> item number three, consent agenda. all matters listed here consent agenda are considered to be routine by the committee and will be acted upon by a single vote of the committee. there will be no separate discussion of these items, unless a member of the committee so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the agenda and considered as a
separate item. >> commission. >> yes, i move approval. >> okay. and i second that motion. and all in favor? >> aye. >> minutes approved. >> clerk: item number 4. designating walkways for accessibility and maintenance. >> chris from c.m.g. we'll be giving this presentation. >> good morning. anyhow, good morning, committee members. i'm with c.m.g. landscape architecture. pleased to be here this morning to share with you the work that
we've been doing over the past years on phase one of the -- yep. >> test. >> there egg with. is that better? >> yes. picking up where i left off on the work we've been doing on the past years of phase one for accessibility and maintenance of walkways. and i'll have to say that i've not presented one paving alone as the subject to a committee before. but i am pleased that we're focused on this topic, recognizing the importance of good design at the details in the public realm. so i'll start out by giving you all a little bit of an overview of some of the considerations that we've had throughout the process, relative to the walkway and paving design. and then we'll go into some detail in each of the different types of materials that we selected for phase one and generally throughout the public realm on treasure island.
and just at quick overview. >> if you could please talk to the mic. >> yes. >> your voice. okay. >> yes. >> move it forward. >> okay. a little bit better. okay. there we go. so phase one of treasure island, as you're well aware, includes all of the areas on the island and the first phase of treasure island closest to the ferry terminal building one and the city side neighborhood. and a quick overview of the many different types of circulation that we're designing for, recognizing the importance of walkability, safety and accessibility with the focus on transit. first, beginning with the pedestrians and pedestrian circulation leading to the intermodal transit hub. bike circulation and the inner relationship between bikes and pedestrians has been an important consideration throughout the design process and i'll talk a little bit more
about that as we move through. vehicular circulation and understanding where the vehicular safety concerns are, with an emphasis on good intersection design and linking the vehicular circulation with the intermodal hub. then lastly, the overall transit circulation with the interconnection of ferry, bus and shuttle services on the island. so in terms of the paving design and material selection criteria that we've had, we really began with durability looking at use types, whether that's pedestrian and bike or vehicular access, e.v.a., and maintenance access. so really understanding what are the use types and what are the appropriate paving materials for each of those types of mobility. accessibility, universal access and really understanding the texture, the material, the color
differentiation for safety. maintenance bag key concern that the paving materials are maintained, and has a looed to do with standardization across the island and also with the availability of materials. when materials do need to be repaired or replaced, they're widely available. geo technical considerations on the island and making sure that the paving designs are linked with the geotechnical improvement program. and then, lastly, the aesthetics of each paving time relative to the public realm and having standard materials and also some special materials that are unique to each place and park. so then getting into the question of durability and use and intensity, pedestrian pavements have their own specific requirements under san francisco's department of public works standards.
looking at the specific requirements for bike use and the desire to have materials that are most effective for bicyclists and other wheeled mobility. multi-use areas where there are both bicycles and pedestrians. e.v. ample and maintenance access and then the intensity or volume of use. this really goes to how much use is expected in each area, the width of paving areas to make sure that the volume of circulation is accommodated and the materials are durable through time. with accessibility really focused on universal access, working closely with the department of public works access coordinator and the mayor's office on disability to ensure that treasure island and are accessible as possible and set a standard for accessibility. with pedestrian and bike safety, a lot of emphasis on making sure
that bile asks and pedestrians are linked at the intersection in ways that allow to allow for pedestrians to see the bicyclists and ensure there aren't conflicts. we worked to make sure there's color differentiations and divide the biactivists from the -- bicyclists from the pedestrians. making sure that the pavement types are slip resistant and jointing design to ensure comfort for a wheelchair users. and then, lastly, real focus on design for the visibility impaired. and we did a unique thing, which is that we worked with the lighthouse for the blind. and developed a braille map for treasure island and worked workh
them to understand the best approach to accessibility for the visibility impaired, with a specific emphasis on the relationship with bicycles. in terms of maintenance, we've really focused on standardized materials, durability, availability, ease of repair and importantly cleaning, recognizing that paving surfaces need to be designed to allow for cleaning operations and remain durable through time. and then with the geotechnical considerations, treasure island, as you know, has an intensive geotechnical program, we have worked closely with the geotechnical engineers to ensure that the paving steins and sections are aligned with the geotechnical program, to avoid settlement and address issues with tree wells, so we don't have issues with trees, within the street right-of-ways and parks. and then, lastly, looking closely at areas that are
pedestrian use versus vehicle uses and understanding that the sections are designed to accommodate those different types of uses. and then, lastly, the ascetics. i mentioned this a little bit earlier. looking to standardize and use materials that are most available, but then also in each park there are some unique paving types, these are intended to add texture and variety to enhance the public realm and create a unique character for each space. so just beginning with the streets, most all of the streets will be owned and maintained by the department of public works. and so they utilize standard materials consistent with d.p.w. requirements. so there's a city standard concrete within the sidewalk walkways. there are -- there's a standard city street section with an asphalt service for all of the vehicular and bikeways. and then in certain of the
furnishings zones, within the streets, there are special paving types, unit pavers and/or stone sets in the furnishing zoning. this shows a few of the places within treasure island in phase 1, where some of those special paving types are used and the intersections. and then in the shared public way, which links to the intermodal transit hub. and then the special paving type that you see here with stone and then concrete unit pavers. and within the parks and open space, there's a selection of materials again based on each of the different use types. and the intensity of use, looking at each of os variety of mixes. and i'm just going to go through each of the paving materials that have been selected for phase one of the project. here beginning with stabilized crushed stone, which is used in limited places within certain of
the parks, where the intensity of pedestrian use is lower. and importantly along the cityside waterfront promenade, the stabilized crushed stone is used with asphalt paving to allow for jogger and runners to have a running surface that's a little bit softer. this is a material that's been used a lot within the ggnra. and this example on the right is from a field that's a paving material that also meets the accessibility requirements and is approved by the department df public works as well. and then we have concrete paving, which there are really two types. there's a standard concrete paving and in certain locations there's enhanced concrete paving, that will include integral color and/or a sand blast or water wash finish. these paving materials are used in pedestrian areas, where there's a desire to have a little bit more of a variety in
terms of the aesthetic quality of the paving service. and then asphalt, which is used primarily for the bikeways and in some cases for park pedestrian pathway. and then concrete unit pavers, which are used in a few select areas in plazas and event spaces, most notably at the waterfront plaza at the ferry and the building one plaza and then a few locations within certain of the parks. and then, lastly, compacted earth trails, which are limited to the natural areas on the island. and these are modeled after best practices that the recreation and parks department has used in glen canyon park and then also the golden gate national recreation area, where there's a need to have a material that's easily maintained by hand. and then basically used for just
the areas where you would have a more rustic trail environment. and those are shown here in magenta on the island. they pair with a number of other pedestrian types, the pathway types, concrete, asphalt walkways that link the island together. so that's the overview of the walkways and paving materials in consideration for phase 1. thank you. >> well, thank you so much for your presentation, wonderful presentation. this walkway is very important to the overall maintenance of the park. and if i would think most of the bulk of the cost will be earmarked and glad you are with us when we actually -- some of us were out of san francisco to new york to present. and, we saw the creativities of
the landscape architects. this is very, very comforting. in particular i know that you're listening to what we're talking about here, by having that braille for the visually impaired and there will be a lot of questions afterward. but our part at treasure island is probably one of the few in the country that is incorporated and really going beyond the call of duty to accommodate everybody, especially the disabled, the seniors and presentation. so i am going to open -- our commissioners have a lot of questions for you. and i'll have commissioner fei to start. >> hello, chris. thank you very much for your report. i don't have any questions. but it's good to note how many different types of conditions there are in the 500 acres that we have on treasure island. and thank you for your report.
>> commissioner lai? >> hi, good morning. is that my mic? hi. i apologize for being a little bit tardy this morning. and maybe you already spoke to this, but it seems like there's a lot of nonporous paving that is being proposed. what is the situation with like water percolation, are we concerned with that? it seems like there's only so much natural topography that we have for more sort of organic materials? can you speak to that a little bit? >> sure. so we have used stabilized crushed stone paving on the city side waterfront area, which is somewhat impervious material, other locations where the use level is lower. it's related to infiltration and
there's a very comprehensive approach to stormwater treatment on both yerba buena island and treasure island, where the water is being collected from the impervious surfaces and treated in a stormwater begans and wetland areas. and so in lieu of using a impervious material which is harder to maintain, clean and less durable, we've focused the stormwater treatment on on landscape-based approaches rather than on the paving material. >> thank you. we'll have this braille type at the intersections. i know we talk about the digital signals, the electronic signaling and all of those. and those will be again -- it will be incorporated into the
infrastructure, right? >> i'm not certain about the use of the braille signage throughout the intersections. we used the braille map really as a way to coordinate with the lighthouse for the blind in terms of the design of the actual paving materials and way finding. but at the intersections, i'm not certain. >> yeah, it would be great, you know, and the subsequent meetings that we've had. and you were not here then. what happens at those intersections? and so this has been an ongoing discussion from this body and all of that. it will be great when we look at your map and we're looking to be able to see where i think your map you showed the road, the bike, the vehicular circulation. it would be great to be able to pinpoint that.
it's something to bear in mind. and then about cost -- we're at the point where we're going to be talking about the maintenance of the parks appear the walkways will be a substantial part of that. will you also be helping us at this point, the expectation is what is required for certain things, to get an overall view, an an approximate view of how much this entails? the materials you're suggesting for different walkways. >> yes. cost has been certain part of the consideration. and that has been a focus of using standard materials as much as possible and then limiting unique or specialized materials to a few select areas. second, i would say we've been working with m.j.m. management
throughout the design process, culling with them on the management and maintenance. and getting advice on the best material selections. and we expect that that will continue as we work to develop more of the management and maintenance plans for each of the parks and the public realm as a whole. >> commissioner richardson: so lastly, in some of those compacted earth, i think a segue to what commissioner lai was asking before, so the geology we definitely know. that would not be any kind of flooding or hills, you know, that's already -- [indiscernible] throughout the parks? flooding? >> yes. braille on yerba buena island. it's very steep over there, as you know. and there are good precedents for those types of trails. again within the national park
and the golden gate national recreation area. and the key there really is to focus on the drainage sign for those pathways to ensure that they don't get washed out and that the drainage is addressed. and then allowing for regular maintenance to make sure that if there are issues, that those are >> commissioner richardson: okay thank you. there are no further questions from the commissioners. any public comments on this matter? okay. if not, thank you again, sir, for your presentation. >> thank you. >> clerk: item number 5. parks maintenance. >> thank you, directors.
bob peck. i wanted to pick up from our prior conversations and talk about park maintenance as we were prepared to do some cost estimating and planning for parks maintenance. as i had mentioned before, parks on treasure island and yerba buena island are going to remain under tightest jurisdiction as the trustee under the tidelands trust. they won't be under rec and park management. but then we may work with an outside entity or a conservancy to administer those maintenance activities. and the c.f.d., the community facilities district, is going to be our long-term source of funding for parks maintenance and operations, in perpetuity. and there were preliminary estimates of parks maintenance
costs that were done as part of the planning for the formation of the c.f.d., but now we're at the point where we want to get more detailed with the planning for that work. in addition to planning for the funding of the work, we need to work as we're beginning to finalize the design for the first parks, for the logistical support of maintenance activities. and it's been discussed about having a centralized maintenance yard, but also distributed storage facilities throughout the parks to assist crews in the maintenance of the facilities. part of finalizing the subdivision map and the public improvement agreement, that accompanies it, there was a -- we worked with city agencies and ticd, the developer, to develop
a matrix of all of the public infrastructure that's being constructed, as prior to the first two subphases. and identified who would be the owner and who would be responsible for the maintenance of those facilities. and those aren't always the same. for instance, in the shared public ways, those surface improvements of the roadway surface in the shared public ways will be owned by the h.o.a. but dedicated to and accepted by d.p.w. for street cleaning and those types of maintenance activities. but the h.o.a. will be responsible -- remain responsible for the actual replacement of the concrete surfaces. so it's fairly comprehensive exercise that we went through as part of the mapping and public
improvement agreement process. within our -- the 290 acres of parks and open space that we have on the island, our planning so far has been to incorporate a corporation yard or maintenance yard into the agricultural farm acreage that's on the island. the farm itself will have its own maintenance and operational support requirements. but then also made for a -- makes for a good location for a centralized corporation facilities to support the parks, maintenance. but we'll need to have distributed facilities and some locations lend themselves to that, you know, we'll have restrooms throughout the open spaces on the island. we also have a number of pump stations, both stormwater and
sewage pump stations that will be located throughout the island and incorporating some small cabinets or storage lockers within or adjacent to those facilities will help with the overall maintenance of the island. this figure shows going back to the p.i.a., the public improvement agreement, and the matrix that was developed in association with it. for the most part, the open spaces on the island indicated in green will be tida responsibilities. the treasure island homeowners' association will be -- will manage the east side commons, as well as some of the pocket parks that occur along the shared public ways on the west side of the island. and then the area in the northwest corner is where the public utilities commission,
wastewater treatment plant will be and they anticipate having a small corporation yard adjacent to that as well. this is a summary of that matrix. picking out the high points. the matrix itself runs some 15 pages in length. but you see the number of the types of materials and the locations that tida will be responsible for. and then this takes that and puts it a little more tabular form to illustrate that tida through the c.f.d. or the h.o.a. will be maintaining and those that will be public works or public utilities as we go forward, we want to look, you know, keep in mind our objectives in maintaining and
operating the open space. of course, we're seeking to provide and maintain great public open spaces that are functional, safe and clean and welcoming to a broad audiences, both specifically families, also residents of the island. and then regional visitors to the island, as well as tourists who may come to the island from locations outside of the barrier. we do have the habitat management plan, which calls for us to provide stewardship for the natural areas on y.b.i., which will require a slightly different focus in activity and a set different level of expertise, with regards to the native flora. and also, you know, through the jobs and equal opportunity program and our partnership with one treasure island and
implementing that document, we want the maintenance programs to provide a pathways to employment, particularly for those that were formerly homeless. on design considerations, i mentioned the need to have adequate maintenance and support spaces throughout the parks. and to plan for the variety of uses and the adaptation of uses, as we move forward through design and through time. in support of these, i mentioned that these parks will not be part of the rec and park system, but rec and park did approach tida and ticd and offered feedback on the designs from their experience. and ticd made a presentation to rec park staff last thursday and got some good feedback and will be continuing that dialogue
going forward. and then i mentioned that, you know, we were looking at the agricultural farm as the final location for a corporation or maintenance yard. we do -- until the agricultural farm is developed, we do have plenty of space to provide interim facilities and we do have two yards on the island today that have supported some of the open space maintenance in the -- in our current state. rubicon landscaping, that provides most of our open space maintenance, they have a yard on the island, as well as the department of public works has a small yard on the island. as we move forward, we'll continue our exploration of conservancy and stewardship
structures. and really start to focus in on what the initial maintenance of hilltop park, which will be our first park to come online. but we'll be adding more and more acreage as the first two subphases are built out. and so defineing what an initial maintenance structure may look like and how that would be managed and expanded over time. as we said, the contracting out has been presumed, but involves labor discussions with un-- with unions and we have some work to do there, as we move forward. and then also working to develop maintenance standards as a basis for ground-up projection of operating costs. and also as i've mentioned in
the past, we're reviewing policies and rules that we may need to have in place prior to opening that hilltop park and what actions of the tida board or the board of supervisors may be necessary to support those roles. that's my update to today. happy to take any questions you may have. >> thank you so much, bob, for that wonderful update. and i'm going to ask the commissioners to lead the questioning. >> yes. we are going to be -- we are in the process of designing some great public open spaces. and some neighborhood parks. we have about 300 acres, which will be an open space in parks. it is and so important, as we've seen historically, with a lot of these parks and open spaces, that if they're not properly
operated, if they are not properly maintained, they then become areas which are either neglected or not comfortable for the public to use. so i think that looking at very seriously the plans for the maintenance and operations is so important. but particularly to make sure that financially, in our budgeting and in our projections, we have the adequate resources to take care and operate and maintain these spaces. the other thing is to look at what income-generating ideas there will be, in order to make these areas much more vibrant. and what i'd like to ask actually is that we've seen some great examples of other public parks, particularly recently in
new york. but some of the commissioners here did not get to attend that tour. and i would like to request that perhaps we have a presentation to the commission, either to this committee or as the board as a whole. the experiences of some other major park, which are comparable to what we're designing and some of the issues that they have faced, some of the operational issues, maintenance issues. i think that would be informative for us to compare and to then see a way forward on how we might operate and maintain our parks properly. >> commissioner richardson: than k you. commissioner lai.
>> commissioner lai: i have questions to ask. what is actually the c.f.d. fee and the expected pot of money that it would generate? >> so the c.f.d. is found initially as a capital c.f.d. and is intended to reimburse ticd for its initial capital contributions, as well as funding operations. so i don't have the figures off the top of my head. if the assessment is based on per square foot of the product type, if it's a town hall or a commercial space, and i can provide an update that goes into more detail on that.
when the c.f.d. was initially formed, the amount of revenue spun off by the c.f.d. far exceeds what we will need to maintain the parks. and that's because it's attempting to reimburse ticd for some of its capitalinvestments. but as a capital c.f.d., the amount collected by the c.f.d., only escalates at 2% per year. and since inflation or the expansion of gross domestic product, you know, averages between 3% and 3.5% per year, real value of the c.f.d. collection decreases over time. but after the initial 42 years when ticd is reimbursed, it will
continue as a capital c.f.d. and still at that time would be spinning off much more revenue than is expected to be required to maintain the parks. and that excess revenue will go into a reserve for us to allow us to implement sea-level rise adaptations as we move forward. and the c.f.d. anticipates collecting a reserve of up to $250 million for sea-level rise adaptations. and then after a period of 99 years, converting from a capital c.f.d. to a maintenance c.f.d. and then continuing forward from that point, as a maintenance c.f.d. and adjusting the -- as a maintenance c.f.d., the annual
adjustment in the amount collected is not limited to 2%, but can be scaled to match the -- an index like the cost of labor in the bay area. the amount that it's projected to collect at conversion is $13 million in -- i believe 2,017-dollars. so that 2,017-dollar value of $13 million escalated forward in time would be the value of that at conversion. but i can do a more detailed update on the c.f.d. in the future. >> commissioner lai: i think that would be really helpful, at least for me. and in that presentation or memo, whatever form it comes before us. if you could also just clarify
whether or not the operation portion of the c.f.d. fund is anticipated, was anticipated to cover anything other than the parks and open space or was it purely just for the parks and open space. >> any infrastructure that tida is going to own or be responsible, would be an eligible expense under the c.f.d. so, for instance, we could spend it on maintenance of building one, which will be a tida-owned building. so the eligible expenses are broad. but, for instance, with building one, the anticipation is that there will be a master lessee for building one and most of those maintenance responsibilities for building one will be part of that lessee, master lessee agreement.
>> commissioner lai: sir, what i'm hearing from you, at the time of the c.f.d. drafting, there was not a proposed -- like earmarking of how the funds would exactly be spent, just basically a list of eligible costs that could qualify it to use the c.f.d. money? >> it's intended to be for the parks and open space maintenance. but largely under all of the things it will be under tida ownership and responsibility. it could be applied to any of those. but the focus is parks and open space maintenance. >> commissioner lai: okay. i think my thought here is that it's -- i find it difficult to talk about the maintenance of the parks and open space without first understanding how much money we have at our disposal, without having a budgeting plan of how the money should be anticipated to be spent. i had sort of assumed that there was some sort of like a broad --
at least like guideline as to like what the percentage of allocation should be at the time of the drafting of the c.f.d., like more of the recent c.f.d. it sounds like that piece might have been missing. so i would suggest that we should fold that exercise into this current conversation. >> okay. maybe i haven't been explaining it. yes, there was a budgeting and the expectation is that those funds, that are -- would go first to parks and open space maintenance. if there were surpluses and there were needs that tida had, that it could use surplus funds for the reroofing of historic officers' quarters or something of that nature. but the first draw or the first call on those funds is the maintenance open.
>> commissioner lai: i see. that makes a huge difference. nonetheless, let's look at what is the actual pot of money and start looking at the actual expenses that would come into the operations, just to make sure that we're not mismatched. but as we all know, labor costs, material costs, everything has gone up from the time when the c.f.d. was first created. and then my next question is why did tida decide to operate the open spaces ourselves instead of handing it over to rec and park? >> i think there were a number of things that were involved in that decision, part of which is that tida, as i mentioned, is the trustee under the tidelands trust agreement. the other thing that has changed significantly, since the time of the entitlement of the program and some of these earlier conversations, was that rec park now has a charter set aside of
revenues that they did not have in 2011. so rec and park was very resource-challenged at the time these conversations were taking place. and through -- rather than that our program needed to be self-sufficient, that our program could not be -- these could not expect to be rec and park parks and part of the general fund demand as the roadways that we have, that will become d.p.w. roadways. those will become d.p.w. maintenance responsibilities. these parks could not be burdened on to the rec parks system. and so the c.f.d. was created and then with a location-specific funding source, i think it was also thought that, you know, when these funds should have -- there
should be a direct correlation between the collection of these funds on the island and the management of the maintenance operations. but some of that is my interpretation from having read some of the documents. but i wasn't here at the time. so i can't speak to it in its entirety. >> questions to this line of questioning, if i could add. in terms of the budget, has there been a budget established for each area of open space? as you know, we've got a whole hierarchy of open spaces from great public waterfront space to neighborhood parks. i would like to know where we are on the budgeting. especially since design has continued and we now know what those spaces are going to be like. and project how they will be used. has there been budgets that have
been done to protect expenses and operations? >> a lot of the budgeting that has been done has been not site-specific. we are in the process of working to develop site-specific budget breakdown. but some of the preliminary projections that were formed, were based on cost per acre of generic or spectrum of park systems, rather than site-specific. >> right. >> that's the process we're trying to go through now. >> right. i think it's the time for us to get more fine grained in looking at the areas, looking at the budget for each of those spaces and then aggregating it to what the total responsibility would be for us. the other thing is in terms of
-- we're putting in now a lot of capital improvements to build the parks. but we know that over time, whether it's 10, 15, you know, 50 years from now, 100 years from now, that those parks will need renewal of some sort. and where does the money come from for capital improvements that will necessarily need to be made. >> during the next 100 years, the -- i describe the c.f.d. will continue as a capital c.f.d. and so one of the big intentions there is to, as i just said, to develop a rise. the c.f.d. it continue to finance capital improvements over that life, through the next 100 years.
beyond the next 100 years, then, you know, we need to develop a -- not we, our successors will need to develop funding strategies beyond that, that horizon, whether that involves the new c.f.d. expansion, a new capital c.f.d. for the island in the future or being part of citywide open space measures. you know, those would be some of the options beyond that 100-year horizon. >> well, that c.f.d. becomes really important, in that it's being used for everything from the maintenance and operations as well, sea-level rise reserves, reserves for capital. but we should in our projections make sure that we have replacement -- adequate replacement reserves for the
continued operations. yeah. >> yeah. >> so the other question that i had is the timing for what you think you'll be coming back to the committee and the board with a more fine-grained operations budget for the c.f.d.? >> i'm hopeful to do that in the may/june timeframe. i can certainly come back with updates before then on some of the revenue side of things. you know, breaking down and providing the detail of the c.f.d. but i'd hope to have something presentable in the may/june timeframe. >> commissioner lai? >> commissioner lai: i echo a lot that commissioner hsen had asked. you had also mentioned that you're anticipating the open
spaces to essentially be contracted out instead of tida, like creating whole new crew of our own d.p.w., our rec and park staff. is contracting it back to rec park one of the options that you're considering? >> i think it could be one of the opportunities that come forward. we are still in the process of trying to develop a scope of what we would propose to put out initially. and then we can have conversation about how best to meet those needs. >> commissioner lai: okay. as long as multiple options are being evaluated. i had a question about the agricultural farm evaluations. is that also intended to be
operated out of temperature -- t of a non-profit-operated farm? >> that's an area for additional exploration. it's more than we would -- more acreage than you would operate as kind of community garden type of farms. one of the possibilities is to -- a couple the operation or the management of a significant portion of the agricultural farm with some of the commercial programs and food production operations on the island. so that space might be managed and operated in conjunction, for instance, with a produce vendor that would be in hangar two. so as we develop -- as we work with ticd to develop retail programs for the hangars, we're expecting to contemplate whether
or not the agricultural farm would be folded in with some of those opportunities. >> commissioner lai: so something like that we would probably not have a plan in place during this like spring budgeting exercise? >> yeah. no. we -- you know, the agricultural farm is -- the initial portions of it are probably at least five years away from being realized and so we don't have detailed -- we wouldn't have detailed budget as part of current-year budgets. the first park so come on board will be hilltop park. and that's going to come on board in the fiscal year '21 budget season or budget window. so a year from now we'll be looking at detailed budgets for hilltop park, as part of next
year's budget. >> thank you. so let me jump in and again for people that are watching remotely, why we are engaged in this lengthy discussion, it's very important. the vitality and again the longevity of the treasure island and the yerba buena islands are actually encumbered on the proper maintenance of the 300 plus acres of parks, the largest in the history of san francisco. i think the takeaway -- it's unfortunate that some of our commissioners were not part of that delegation to new york, because the exercise there was to look at signatures, iconic parks throughout the country. what the genesis are, what are the models, successful models that people are utilizing to
maintain these parks. parks are extremely very expensive. one of the mistakes that people in san francisco finally realized, when the san francisco development agency was dissolved, they had created all of these parks. and even as i speak, the city is still grappling with the maintenance of all of those parks. here you have all of these assets, all over the place throughout the city. and we do not know what they're going to look like in 20 years' time and even don't talk about the 30 years. we have the responsibility here at this agency for the maintenance, for some of the spaces, our responsibility. and what we need to do is broaden this, so we're not gephart changing ourself -- we're not short changing ourselves into any models, given again all of the mistakes in san
francisco. what i would suggest, we sneed to engage in an exercise for the administration. we need to create private entities of the administration of this park. we have discussed the c.f.d. option. there are limitations. there are still some holes to plug in there. and again looking at some of the successful models in the country, we will need to engage in those exercises so what are the limitations, what are we going to do to again guarantee the maintenance of these parks. in your presentation, one of the things you mentioned, i want to begin that we have right now, one of the robust developments
as part of the treasure island development. the agreement that we have we want treasure island. so we're getting all of the youth and adults, most of them at-risk, they've been looking at the demolition of the buildings. we need to have a partnership with the unified school district and to see right now how we can have all of these pipelines. we are going to be owning this. and whatever non-profit entity that we create, we have to create an entity. it's mandated that we create an entity for the maintenance. and we need to have a framework, we need to have all of this possibilities where we can at least join san francisco residents to be part of the
maintenance of that park. it's cost effective and we're also creating jobs. so i am going to be looking at the development fund. this is the time to start in the budget, pulling all of these things into place right now. it's right at the corner. so yesterday we need to start that. i know that bob -- this agency has at least been forthright in helping and keeping that ongoing. that is great. all of this other agency that may want to be involved or whatever. i think the primary objective for us is to be able to demonstrate that we're capable and that we've looked extensively into creating an entity to the management of this parks. [ please stand by ]
>> and work income generating that we have so we can begin to have the outreach to these entities that we are looking at, so we have to a lot of work ahead of us, but these discussions are timely, and this is the best time to have all the is going now, including the budget and what we anticipate, and how we need to proceed from here. commissioners, are there any other suggestions, comments before i ask the public to intervene? okay. questions for those in the audience, any public comment on these items? none. next item on the agenda, please. >> item number 6, on island events. >> jack nathanson, who manages our events booking and events
programming on the island is going to give us an overview of some of the historical venues, as well as some of the events that we have historically had to recur on the island. >> good morning, commissioners, jack nathanson. i'm presenting today. just to get off the brief history regarding events on the island, we will review a venue, by venue, there is a listing of them right there, and we will talk about each one. first, we will talk about the core venue on the island for years, it offered about 4,000 square feet of event space, a full kitchen, it was sort of a wedding factory for us for years and years, at its peak, it
generated about a quarter of a million dollars a year in event revenue, as you know, it was deconstructed in 2016 during the first phase. and right behind it there is the treasure island chapel that we did numerous wedding ceremonies pickett also closed in 2016. the mansion was the home of many events. we had at least to a small events company for four years while they did small weddings on the lawn and receptions inside the building. the bay bridge ramps project, combined with constant construction on the island really makes it, not viable, quite noisy over there, but the facility still stands.