tv [untitled] August 7, 2013 4:30pm-5:01pm PDT
got together e together and one of the promises t is 5 hundred though dollar grant it's called the project study report and that will keep the project moving along. the last projects are the van necessary project. it's august 12th. we made a connotati to action that's the september 10th final documents. mta will do so on september 17th and we'll get the report at the end of the environmental report. 3450e789 mta is moving forward with the project.
last but not least the authority received a grant for the travel demand management. it's a complicated project. this is a true partnership we're working with the mta sf environment trying to leverage private sector dollars that are in transportation land management to make it more friendly through a number of different mriltsz. mta has drafted an initial approach to address the muni transportation issues. we will come back with mta to present to our advisory committee and the plans and programs committee in august and september temp. this will be an update at the
same meeting. with that i'll be happy to answer any questions >> colleagues any questions or comments. okay. we can go on to the public comment with the directors remarks. seeing none, public comment is closed. this is an informational item so let's go on to our consent calendar >> items 5 through 17. colleagues if there are any of you who wish to sever any items, items 5 through 17. okay. we can go on to public comment for our consent. okay. we don't take public comment on consent. very good. can we have a change of house let's do consent
calendar >> (calling names) those recessess pass. >> madam clerk we're going to take a couple of items out of order items from the finance committee. first off items 19 and 21 and i believe commissioner mary has commented on those. thank you chair avalos. claergz over the past two weeks the finance committee has engaged in the bus transit but
especially the one in m district that's shared with supervisor farrell and breed and chu. the gary radical bus transit project. out of the prospective jurors programs i understand the frustration of supervisor wiener and the details that president chiu has discussions and i share those strongly as well. and if you think we're frustrated you should see the folks from the neighborhoods especially those who ride transit who are not able to have the transit bus system delivered in a timely manner. in the richmond district we need a satisfactory and liveable boulevard like on gary.
especially the drivers and walkers. on gary you've heard the 38 gary helps 55 thousand riders a day and over 80 thousand in the corridor and they need the service delivered. the progress to date has been way too slow. i'm very - i'm very pleased that my office and others have been working hard to get this project sped up and the new team within the transportation authority and supervisor breed and my office have been making excellent progress over the 6 to 9 months. the ta has designed many things to mitigate the loss of parking. and new approaches to blend
options like the masonic tunnel and the fillmore tunnel but with the leadership that will hopefully revicinity the japan town and fill more district to look at the tunnel and hopefully close the gap that has divided those neighborhoods for 40 or 50 years. i'm aggressively pushing a new deadline with the support of president chiu for the gary b r t not for 20/20 as planned as discussed in the past but to open in 2018. so moving those issues and items forward without dlie is critical for that 94 now a aggressive deadline. so those projects will provide a
new spine or backbone to the city with the vanessa and expand the transit and bart. but the bus rapid transit systems as a number of those in administratrix city are an important way to connect up. i appreciate the sharp criticisms that supervisor wiener has brought up to help me and many that so for the the b a r t. so we can complete the virile report and fully develop now a alternatives has so much promise i hope you'll please support that. join me many helping this to
move forward >> thank you. we haven't called those items. >> item 19 increase the professional contract by 9 million plus not to exceed 8 hundred million for a environmental rapid gary project and the environmental report slash statement and also the modification of the project. appropriate the m k prop funds for environmental analysis and help the gary project environmental report slash statement. the cash flow distribution schedule and the 5 year program. in the an action item >> very good.
i want to thank commissioner mar for his comments and ed wiener during the finance commission. it is a big complex topic and there's plenty of room for improvement. we intended today to focus on some high-level all the times to you to stand up and get the benefits to the folks on the ground. those are based on a meeting with had with the director of mta last friday. we have a presentation and we have the day-by-day project team here as well. during the past it is very beneficial to have a large number of board members really
putting the spotlight because project delivery is effective at the staff level and those are things we need to advocate but to have the clear board accountability is something we've looking forward >> before you decide to speak we have comments as well commissioner weaning. >> thank you. has been noted i'm commissioner and commissioner chu has raised some concerns at the finance committee. i'm a huge supporter of bart and i hope, of course, b r ts going forward. it's a key parted of the future in improving our transit system i'd like to have a wider transit
of buses but b r t should be quicker way to deliver rapid service and to be converted into the future. we've seen this that instead of being what it should be a less expensive and quicker way of delivering service we're seeing unending process and more and more money being put into the market analysis. and this is money to go into the environmental process as opposed to get to the construction and getting it delivered. so we're not being asked to pit money into the creation of b r t we're asking to put more money after a decade of evaluation and analysis before we get to any
kind of project deliver process. that's a really significant frustration. we've seen, you know, this is a boarder project delivery. we've been getting many analyze about more delay. it doesn't serve our city well, when they have the leadership around the b r t when those projects - they just drag on and on and we sfend more money on the process. it's been a decade and it's completely unacceptable. my question is this is a nice power point presentation why should we - and i guess it
states we're going to trim two years off the delivery why should we have confidence this is going to actually happen he in terms of that shorter deliver process. given the challenges that mta has had and in delivering the projects in a time effective way why should we be confident this is real. that's a question to staff. through the chair >> that's an excellent quo. basically you're saying why should you trust us >> let's be clear this isn't about the mta this is a boarder issue why should i trust the process in general.
this is not a hit or criticism directed at the city staff >> if you feel compelled to stand up. but back to this particular project we also at that time, point have had the ability to absorb some of the lessons and we have some understanding of the rapid bus transit so we you shouldn't have to have the same discussions oh, again. another part that will go towards the credibility this is not a rocket scientist case. we can start to get some of the improvements only the ground and that will build more
conversations we can deliver and tim can speak to i know there was a presentation speaking to the mayor's office that they're under talking to deliver the larger and small projects and a director for the strategic planning. i think supervisor wiener and other directors you've made the point very clear. we're acutely aware of this issue. we're looking at ways to improve the project delivery. but you're correct the environmental analysis has taken lee a long time. there was a decision made that should be noted a few years back to not do the improvements so we can get the larger scale
projects out the door. now in behind sight we need to have the incremental improvements to bring in incremental improvements and at the same time deliver our projects better. there's a very rich process in san francisco. and working with that rich process has had it's challenges. the more it is up consonant o front we'll get a better picture. but i want to stress we're working very closely with the transportation authority to make the best way forward. we believe we have a process to improve the project gary. i'm happy to go more into detail after the presentation >> chairman.
how - and i know that the mta wants to improve the project timelines. it's not just a challenge with the larger projects but the smaller ones. it's sometimes very brain damaging to move projects forward >> yeah. >> and that's for small not hard ones that have a lot of community support without a lot of controversy. so in terms of confident levels that once the mta finishes the analysis this is a realistic timeline. given the time it will take another 5 years to deliver the project is too long but but why should we be confident.
and in the context the mta was prepared to force that project to be side lanes and it wouldn't be beneficial and mta was barreling in that districts and because of some creativity thinking we were able to come up with a resolution for the center lanes. given 3 history and this history why should we believe it will be deliverable >> we see it differently. we work very closely to come up with the center lane proposal and to speed it up. while it wouldn't get you the full beneficiary it will get i
incremental improvements. the community pressures that will reduce the time benefits we came up with the proposal together and i actually that is not my recollection of why they were pushing for the side lanes it was for some operational reasons so my recollection is different >> we'll let that one pass. we feel more confident because we've had increased the training and set aside project managers to take on the side street proochdz. we have the project that was a rail project but we made it a complete street project we improved the bicycle lanes as well as and that came in under
budget. when we put our heads together being very clear about the scope and schedule and actually having the budget to deliver we can deliver on time but when the expectations are not clear we have those discussions oh. i can list you a dozen projects from a simple baseball bat to other similar projects >> i'll stoney hope that mta is moving in a better direction in terms of project delivery. it's just been a real challenge on a love issues. and i won't get into the project the church and mta refuted to correct it
>> i want to join the colleagues. i like many of us in this body have been a long time supporter but it's embarrassing how we're not able to deliver the process on time and we shouldn't have us hold up the projects to facilitate the meetings we've heard over the past week. i understand that finally mta and go others are getting together and how they can deliver their projects better. why should we not continue this item to really understand what exactly you guys are going together but from our prospective this is work that should have happened out our
intervention and i have concerns if we're not watching this will continue so explain to us and assure us in the coming weeks that this will be dealt with in a better way and what kind of deliveryables will we receive to make sure our trains are running on time >> yeah. it maybe that some of this b will come out in the presentation. but your first question was why not defer this until the end meeting. the project will keep moving by the other way it is slowing down the consultant work on the environmental won't sped up is the process. i think you're right about
watching this closely. one of the elements we had is making sure we do regular meetings to the mta board on this project. additional at sometime we should have a meeting >> i think that's a great idea. >> very good commissioner campos. >> actually, i wanted to thank president chiu to help to pull together the mta with the ta and this process with the single team approach is the right one to move projects forward more speedily in addition to a a lot of the other sessions that will come up in the presentation. my understanding of the b r t whatever it's at its sometimes
much more simple than the gary boulevard b r t with the tunldz. i know that a lot of the planning into the environmental analysis is much more complex. i think it's my understanding that this funding for the engineering group and the xhauch design is in and out out of the budget it's only being phased in itself a phased approach so it's not an additional amount of money but it's important for the complexity like the project gary boulevard the tunlz that are divided differently. i urge the colleagues to think about this. that is a phased funding system. there's great things going on i'm happy we're discussing that.
but i think detailing this would be harmful and we need the environmental report done and the approach that the transportation staff and i thank the gentleman for being here this will help to engage the neighborhoods to be a part of the process and i'm for that process as well >> i think the idea to join mta and ta meeting to get the projects moving more quickly and i'll be very brief. i think that the issues that are raised are important but i think they go beyond this individual project. the issue of coordination and project delivery is something else we've been discussing and so i think that if we're going to start talking about that we
should have a larger discussion about project delivery period. i think with respect to this project this project has moved forward in the right direction. i feel and understand the frustration by it's a frustration that i think should be focused on the larger issue of the overall transportation agencies within the city. i think that the joint meeting make sense and i actually also think that having a discussion about sort of who owners the project and who is ultimately responsible if something goes wrong should be a part of the discussion because sometimes you, have too many cooks in the
kitchen but i don't see any delays. thank you very much. commissioner weaning you have any other comments >> i appreciate the work that's gone on over the past two weeks to get this back on track in terms of the timing. my confident level is not high i will support this today. i don't want to cut off our notices despite our faces and denying the funding or detailing it as frustrating as it is we're in the phase of this project detailing it will not help the project. but i want like the better market street plan i think we do need to as a board start exercising some very hands on
consistent oversight and regular report backs in terms of what progress has been made are we on track? is the timeline holding? i think we're going to have to see that over the next 6 months. but i will support the time overview item today >> i'm glad we want the project to move. so i think we're ready for you and a well, thank you very much for that set up oar i'm the director for the capital projects. i participated in the meeting with director reiskin and the san francisco municipal transportation agency. i'm going to talk about the recommitment and management
efforts that the two agencies intend to take. i have with me the mta project manager and should there be any technical questions david will be happy to answer those and, of course, we have wretched e representatives from mta here today to answer additional questions. just by way of set up weighing we'll menace the gary corridor. more than 050 thousand corridor riders a day are identified by mta. it's a prop k cased specifically identified within our expenditure plan. the document began work identifying the 3 projects. since then and part of the reason for the growing complexity of the project is a
sort of a variation on alternative 3 the center lane bus rapid transit project. this involves a consolidated approach that used both the limited and local service essentially operating the same facility. the goals that have come out of the meeting with mta and reflecting the urgency that the commissioners have communicated to us is to certify the document and have a full transmitted service by 2018. the key, of course, is how do we get there. so where what are the means to achieving those goals. we think