Skip to main content

tv   Municipal Transportation Agency 71916  SFGTV  August 9, 2016 5:00am-9:01am PDT

5:00 am
or unfinished business by board members. >> members of the board are we good? >> item 7, directors report >> good after chairman nolan and members of the board and members of the public could i want to start out by recognizing some of our employees and a couple other quick items for you. first i like to ask don ellison to come forward and recognize a long time training spreadable of
5:01 am
ours who's decided to retire after mere 39 years of service. >> good afternoon. director nolan and fellow directors good it's my honor today to recognize a gentleman that was for this agency for over 39 years. that is paul peterson. he was a superintendent of operator training along with him is a manager of operator training kim anderson. they were together for six years and operator training but much longer within the agency. all began his career as an operator in march 1977. in 1983, he was promoted to transit supervisor in central control and then later to operations. in january 20,000 2000 he was superintendent of operator
5:02 am
training. paul peterson's 39 years and four months in operator training is marked by core value of supporting people and their job and careers, making sure the public transportation needs are met and if you ask any of his colleagues, patience and persistence. paul success includes restarting the sfmta eight the bus radio in april and peevishly managing all bus rodeo. with this he graduated 1000 new operators in the last five years with a record 481 in 2015. training operators and also training operators who are now or past managers in the transit division. paul says his favorite position with the agency is the one he retired, now i'm a but a close second
5:03 am
was his work as the evening shift transit supervisor for cable cars. without setting the standard for keeping service on time and working with groups and conductors on customer service. on june 22, paul was honored with a banquet attended by current as well as retired staff of sf mta and muni. i was protested up her certificate of honor from the board of supervisors and a plaque from his coworkers. paul has two children brian and christian. brian i'm his own works were with sf mta in the maintenance department good christian words with the sheriff's department of san diego. in his retirement paul plans to focus on his family-tthe grandkids >>[laughing]-his family and his two 1956 patterns with these risk conditioning. as a member of the packard club car shows on paul's future. i want to take this time to congratulate him wrapping up a great career at this sfmta a and kim apperson will speak a few words about all. >> mr. anderson.
5:04 am
>> thanks very much. appreciate the opportunity. paul has been more than just being a great employee. he has been the person you can look up to. i mean you've got that many years on your belt in this business, you're bound to pretty much have an answer for just about everything that comes along. there isn't anything he has not seen we certainly still take advantage of this today. just because a zero tired we still outlined to his home. so we still call him. but for me personally, it is been a fantastic journey and i feel like i would not be what i am today it wasn't for his guidance. so, to paul and to his family and everyone, it
5:05 am
does my heart good. so, he deserves more than what we could possibly give him. so thank you very much, paul >> mr. peterson come on behalf of the board of directors and the entire agency all people of the city thank you so much for your very impressive record of service for 39 years and four months. wonderful. we're very grateful to you and wish you all the best in retirement. >>[applause] >> thank you very much. good afternoon directors. i appreciate this recognition. a couple things i want to mention good one is changed and the other one is gratitude. as far as change, you can imagine after 39 years have seen a lot of change here. i started to transit operator and there was $.25. the discount there was five cents. there were still very interested i could not believe it. it was very reasonable done. i think we have one of the lowest fares back in that day. so it was pretty amazing. then-another
5:06 am
thing about change is i want to mention that this agency has moved so far forward in all these years, it's kind of stagnant for a while. we did not get to find then suddenly we just took off. especially in the last 15 years or so it's been really really much better with many many improvements in this agent. that i've seen. i first started with 345 brand-new trolley buses, electric trolley buses, and i was told 12 of them had a radius. the rest of them did not. so, late-night run musical central control could i make it on the logic i do not endorse residential area because there was no payphones around her. when the were payphones available, they were $.10. that also tells you how long ago did we were told we be reimbursed by the $.10. so, next is gratitude. i just want to thank all the board members for this recognition. i want to thank all my coworkers from all the divisions at mta. i could i do anything by myself. all i am is a part of team. people that
5:07 am
work here at the agency these days and all of the desert divisions are mutually hard workers. strong work ethic and good character and just amazing what i've seen in the years how hard people work these days. especially managers and supervisors and of course, the operator is out there on the front lines. i do want to recognize our training team here. they been like family to me. that's one of the things i feel bittersweet about is as and 30 i is i know it's time to go but i hate leaving these people get it you would please, stand up our management team from training. >>[applause] >>[calling names]. great
5:08 am
people. just great work ethic. i could not get measure of success without people like this. backing me up and backing us up. we were together as a team in this agency. it's a wonderful place to work. i used to tell the new operators when they first came in, with a would introduce me they would say and how superintendent he's been here for 30-39 years. i would get in front him and told him the reason i been here so long and have not left because there's wonderful people to work with. i hated to go but that's like it you have to block it once again, thank you for much for this recognition it is very much appreciated. >>[applause] >> thank you. next i like to ask tom maguire sustainable streets directors come forward and recognize another long-time employee one who is also among the best rest city employees of 29,000 us. >> good afternoon directors.. i've the honor to recognize howard johnson. mr. johnson, please. join us. mr. johnson is retiring after 16 years of service to a crossing guard program. he is wonderful
5:09 am
crossing guard, conscientious libel energetic and respected by the students and school staff at the schools.. he worked at rosa parks elementary for 10 years and the last six years he's been at-elementary. he says he enjoys working as a crossing guard. he certainly was be around children. prince will come teachers students and families at mckinley. he's got a report as far as we know there's ever been a crash or pedestrian integer injury on his wife. that's of course the most important part of the job of crossing guards do. they refer to howard as a neighborhood institutions aim is always courteous and is a kind word for anybody who passes answers the community and school well. in 2014 but the irb report with a blog who wrote a very nice piece on howard entitled, meet howard johnson, the best dressed crossing guard in town.
5:10 am
>>[laughing] the article highlighted keen fashion sense but also the great job how seriously he takes it. he's a great family man and his family is with him today and he served his country in korea from 1950-1953. so we take our first 16 years of service with the city and we missed wish him nothing but the best in retirement. >>[applause] >> mr. johnson come on behalf of the board of directors and the entire agency novel people in the city, thank you for your outstanding work. it's hard to imagine more important position in taking care of the children you've done for so many years. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> how about your family? >> my wife. this is my daughter. and my son and my other daughter went out. >>[laughing] >> will thank you again. >> thank you very much. >> the clapping >> >>[applause] >> mr. reiskin >> finally, in terms of
5:11 am
recognition, a couple weeks ago on july 7 in union square we hold the 53rd annual cable car bellringing competition and championship. we are pleased to have a winner here today. we have a great turnout. as you know there's two different categories. there's the professional and amateur. the mature category was won by a woman named fast cut for 96.5 radio. her proceeds the proceeds from that category go to the charity of their choice of the person who won. she had a actually an amazing performance but a whole bunch of cows. it was really wonderful. but we also want to recognize the professional winner good one thing of note with this years, edition, we have the first ever female entrant as a participant because sandra griffin. we were
5:12 am
really happy to see her there while she didn't win or place we're hoping to see her and others follow in years to come. but we did want to recognize that the winner. third place went to johnny whitaker a previous winner. second place went to last year's champion and previous winner byron cobb. but we are here today to recognize the first-place winner, who is now i think a four-time worm 85 time champion , and we have for him i think he brought it here himself but we cut out very large trophy but also his own cable cartel. so please join me in congratulating leonard oakes. >>[applause] >> we have a bell here in case you might be able to entice them to giving us a little- >>[applause] >> congratulations. wonderful.
5:13 am
>> thank you. think you very much. thank you very much. >>[bell ringing] >> >>[applause] >> more difficult job of carrying that back. the event
5:14 am
is meant to celebrate the cable cars but also the extraordinarily scale of the folks who operate and maintain the cable cars system and is i think you know, it takes a lot of physical strength and agility . it takes great customer service skills. it's a very challenging job and to be able to do all that and master bellringing is spectacular. so we look forward to seeing everyone at the 54th annual next year where leonard will be accepting his championship. two other quick items. today, at the downstairs at 2 pm with the board of supervisors meeting and under very large agenda are essentially, all the budget related items for the next two years including our budget and every other city agencies budget. as well as large slew of potential ballot
5:15 am
initiatives, and i think today is our first opportunity to vote on both budget and ballot initiative. i think it's necessarily their last so that may or may were may not votes today. our budget is with the rest of the city's budget and we hope will be approved if not today, soon thereafter. the other two ballot initiatives that i've mentioned to you previously are still, are alive and at the full board. one of them would change the appointment process to this very board. that would give the board of supervisors 83 of the seven appointments. all which are currently in the mayor. it would also change the thresholds required by the board of supervisors to eject an mta budget which is currently requires seven members of the board of supervisors. witching that requirement 26. so, that
5:16 am
is of the board today. as well as charter amendment that we worked on with the transportation authority, with the mayor's office with numerous stakeholders including the transportation justice coalition. that would provide for dedicated funding for transportation and homeless services. about $100 million a year for transportation and 50 million for homeless service. these manager plan on the hundred and million as i share with you before, was based initially on the recommendations from ayers 2030 transportation task force which recommended just this kind of measure. also, it was a justified modified with input from the transportation justice coalition provided for some regional funds such as for parked cars and cal train electrification. also for muni service affordability inequity funding so for example we can ensure the continuation of our free and reduced they are programs that we could fully fund muni equity strategy and
5:17 am
protect against service cuts in the event of an economic downturn. so there was a great process to get to what seemed to be a consensus measure. there was also in front of the board three quarters cent sales tax which would generate incidentally about $150 million a year. which could provide a funding source for that charter amendment. alternatively, there is also a have sent sales tax dedicated to transportation following largely the same expenditure plan that is before the board as well. so, just want to remind you that is where things are in terms of how the votes will turn out it is anyone's guess, but the first opportunity to vote on those is a full board will be today at 2 pm. two other quick things. in terms of vision zero, and will be endeavoring to bring new vision zero updates at the board meeting get just a brief one today. education
5:18 am
efforts will soon kick off a conference of vision zero safety media campaign. beginning with the radio campaign starting in early august, in time to coincide with back to school, which for san francisco public schools is august 15. the ads will run on drivetime radio, focusing on increasing the public understanding of traffic safety in the city, focus on increasing the knowledge and belief that it doesn't have to be this way. working to build support for actions both personal action that we can take. also, systemic changes to create safer streets in the subject the idea with the vision 01 odds is accepting people get hurt and die on our street. so, changing kind of reinforce it doesn't have to be this way. this things we can do individually and as that agency as a society to make that change. we will follow that in september with kickoff of an enticed beating campaign. we
5:19 am
should have been campaign messages for other four campaigns every month which include vision zero, before the partition zero awareness anti--speeding and motorcycle safety, and pedestrian yielding. this whole campaign is based on a lot of research that we've done in terms of one of the issues to address and how best to communicate and engage people in understanding. so, look out for that or listen out for that. starting next month. finally, just to note, our sister agency, bart is going to be shutting doing some weekend closures between guilty city and glen park. during starting this month and running through october. these will be weekend closures and a part of a tract work that art started throughout the system earlier this year. for this section will be seven weekends. delete" begin in july and the weekend
5:20 am
after next july 30-31 and after that the weekend before school starts august 13-14 and one on and off on select weekends through mid october. during that time, trains will be providing free express shuttle returning the stations between daly city and glen the pr muni will be providing free local shuttles between the two stations as well as balboa park which is between the two. the part will have extra staff and signage at stations to assist the writers. regular caltrain service will also be available for people going to the pencil. there's alternatives and of course there's the regular muni service that serves the stations such as the verge 08-14, 49 and 54. i just went remind folks that happened you were all collaborating across the region caltrain, and bart
5:21 am
to make sure it's painless as possible but it's great to see bart doing this important infrastructure work such as will soon be doing on the twin peaks tunnel. that concludes my report. >> thank you. members of the board, questions or comments? >> one member of the public has indicated a registered addressing the board discussed by mr. reiskin. herbert weiner. >> [inaudible] >> only on matters addressed by mr. reiskin, yes. >> so, howard strasser. i want to recognize my neighbor is your newest member. then, i want to go back to what reiskin said about this charter change which would change how your appointed. you know, if you go
5:22 am
back to when the transit advocates wrote proposition e we could not get signatures on the streets ourselves we went to the supervisors as it would you put this on the ballot for us. david changed anything. this is a big step. i think they really know that they don't want to get involved in muni. because when they get involved in muni three, their involved you see you want to make a little improvement someplace and the neighbors come to their office and say, we can do this and can't do that. you actually by the way your appointed you protect them from undue influence and we have to make progress in transit first. our supervisors ,, unfortunately, think they will not have that push forward fast enough to make more progress. so i would hope each of you would take a moment and talk to your favorite supervisor and say, look, you don't want to do this. it's what to trip you up eat. you're going to appoint people and i don't want to stop transit first and too often supervisors
5:23 am
.. signs up and you have to take them out good all this crazy stuff constantly happens just to clean up after the mess. so, we should tell them they don't want it. it's not good for them. or us, thank you. >> they could anyone else. to address the board on the directors report? seeing none, mdm. clerk >> item a. item 8, citizen advisory report >> good afternoon. we did good afternoon. today of the two motions to report on. first is pretty straightforward suggestion but the sales tax charter amendment which combines homelessness and transportation separated into two different but equal amendment. that's more directed towards the board of supervisors but i thought i'd share that with you as well. secondly, we are presenting a motion about which follows up on a number of
5:24 am
motions over the past year since we been created and support of the historic and vintage fleet at the municipal railway. sf mta,, cac recommends that the mta proceed with planning and engineering work for this to work streetcar extension to fort mason. that the mta be visit ridership projections as appropriate based on recent and projected changes use of space, and non--commute events at fort mason. the increase in ridership anticipated to result from upgrade to the stork streetcars on market street. finally, the mta-cac recommends the mta work with us house and senate delegation to secure funding for the design and engineering phase of this project. that's it. >> thank you very much. this
5:25 am
is the second recommendation for my totally support that. i think we ought to move on that as quickly as we can. it's a great base. it moves people across the city. i can see caltrain going out there several kinds of events. so i know director reiskin has a response to that as well but thank you for that. i support that. members of the public get to address >> yes that you have several. will speak on >> >>[calling names] >> mr. chairman and members of the board, my name is white mike wilmot. i'm a marina rested a regular muni rider and i strongly support this extension. as a longtime spur member, i've continuously involved in muni planning since 1995 including spending many hundreds of hours drafting proposition e which of course
5:26 am
without none of us would be here. that includes many hours in meetings with howard, and if you permit me a slight digression i feel i agree fully with everything he said about the split board, split appointment process. it took a while for this board and this agency to get rolling. but under your leadership in the leadership of director reiskin, your publishing more now than we ever have. when i g with respect to the extension into fort mason, the 30 and 30-x still serve the chestnut corridor and 30, the banas corridor and incidentally to my appreciate the sensitivity which you handled the recent improvements along the chest that corridor 430 and the 30-x. the fort mason center is still
5:27 am
not very well served but no direct service to fisherman's wharf were downtown. the proposal to extend the in f-924 mason just one more minute-when not serve marina residence downtown but serve thousands of visitors to fort mason. we are transit first city and fort mason still depends on too much on the audible. please prioritize the extension of the trolley onto its close to shovel ready then they'll accept it the decision is completed that the mta and national park service have all signed off get there's always two federal resources and there's no other monies for >> thank you. >> thanks. next speaker, please. >>[calling names] >> good afternoon chairman nolan and directed my name is ivan and manage capital budget at 4 mason ctr.. the center's
5:28 am
mission is to support the nonprofit arts community. we have over 1.3 million visitors come through our campus. we house over 21 tenants including one sitting tenants a blue bear school of music, city college, restaurants [inaudible]. along with a bunch of short-term events geared towards the arts community and were excited to bring [inaudible] art is. jewell school campus construction has commenced an open their 60,000 square-foot graduate campus in 2017. despite a volume of activity and the activity of our neighbors, national park service in san francisco back and part, were situated in somewhat of a transit desert along the northern waterfront. the narrow pub to downtown a least half a mile away. additional public transit service to the toolkit is would
5:29 am
bolster our attendance. our iceberg and most importantly will better tighten the heart of the city to northern waterfront. prodding our audience and strengthening access to our and far commuted as scrabble in fort mason center provide tourist improved public transit options. in the marina neighborhood residents will have additional means of access for commuters traveling to downtown. i incurred you to support the citizens advisory council recommendation to continue planning and securing funding for the streetcar extension 24 mason ctr. affirming our collective commitment to building a transit first city. thank you. >> thank you. >>[calling names]. those are the last two people. >> i'm jim chappell chairman of the board of fort mason center for arts and culture. as you just heard. we are very vibrant place. we have 1.2 million visitors a year right now. only the young resume attacks more of that a cultural
5:30 am
institutions in the city. we are doing quite a bit of re-tenants as people are moving. transit is simply not very good. we've recently had two african-american cultural organizations, who have wanted to come to fort mason and both of them said but how will we get our people here? we can't get our people here. we believe there are two programs that are possible to start funding the historic streetcar line. the federal lands transportation program and the federal lands access program. neither of these would cannibalize any other muni rail extension because they're only available for the projects on federal land and half of this route is on federal land. it might also
5:31 am
be possible to get a tiger grant for this and as you've heard, it's fully entitled and luminary engineering would probably be $5 million. we really like it to be prioritized to find the money and to move this project along. thank you that much >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> last person to turn in a speaker card regarding this topic. >> good afternoon chairman nolan and directors. i'm rick-present on market st., railway. sfmta is nonprofit preservation partner. we have been advocating for this extension for over 10 years. it was originally in muni's plan for historic streetcar service going way back to 1980 date we think it's time to build it. we think it's unique project the kind of got lost in the shuffle because the planning was done
5:32 am
by the national park service at the environmental level, but that was agreed to because there's a lot of sensitive historic issues having to do with the federal land, but half of the extension is on city streets. so, it's really a hybrid cooperative project and now it's been turned over to sf mta for implementation. so, we support this cac and we would note that this cac is comprised of members from each supervisors district in the city would make their unanimous decision perfective of the factors is something that really benefits all san franciscans. it provides access to the northern waterfront for people from underserved neighborhoods in a very attractive and easy to connect weight provides connection to caltrain, bart, and other regional services. so we support the cac's motion. thank you >> thank you. >> mr. chairman that the last person to turn in a speaker card. >> you can't know everything that can be spoken on this is really a great project. fort mason wants this so badly that they're ready to give up some parking places to get the
5:33 am
terminal a place to stop. that's really commendable. the other thing that is unique singletrack i think that's pretty cool. you may place up ever seen it is in turkey. then, per chance to go on to provide additional service to the presidio really is even worse transportation place, then fort mason would be very useful. >> thank you. members of the board any questions or comments on the citizens advisory board report? mr. ramos. >> did you say that there was half a mile walk to transit and him look in my mop and from what i call the 43 stops very close to their if i'm not mistaken. can you maybe articulate livermore about-the >> yes. i was physically talk about >> state your name >> it's a half-mile walk to a bus line that would take you downtown. you have to connect.
5:34 am
it'll take 45 min. >> thank you for clearing that up. >> anyone else? thank you mr. weaver and members of the citizen advisory committee. appreciate your. mdm. clerk >> moving on to item 9. public comment this is a member of member to the public to address the board of directors on matters within the boards jurisdiction and are not on the today's calendar. >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. thank you for the chance to speak to you today. my name is--i live in mission neighborhood in san francisco. i've lived on and off year for about three years to really love this city. i love the public transportation.
5:35 am
i am also a writer of the commuter shuttle program. i just want to express how much i appreciate that program. and it benefits me personally. it allows me to live here without a car, and because i care deeply about the environment and also about the city that's important to me. there have been some shuttle stops moved in a laminated and that does affect me personally. my commute has been made a longer but any potential stop or elimination, especially in the dolores park neighborhood, might force me to reconsider whether i need a car in order to get to and from work. so, i just want to reform the value of the program. the importance of the continued existence of the shuttle stops and just how much i appreciate your work in considering this matter. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >>[calling names].
5:36 am
>> good afternoon >> good afternoon. thank you chairman nolan and directors for your opportunity to speak. i live in san francisco. i live on their oak street near 21st. i use the commuter shuttle to go to work every day and i've seen over the last few months the shuttle has moved further and further away from item. these three shuttles at 18th and charged and 24 than valencia. now, they been moved as far away as shaw has and 26. and as well as 16th and sanchez. so more than half a mile away. i think i would prefer not to drive to work. some of my coworkers that did i still want to the shuttle but as it's become less can be nothing more and more people are going to do that you i prefer not to. there's an area now between douglas street and brian street, between 18th st.
5:37 am
at 21st st. which is zero permitted commuter shuttle stop. i think that a lot of people live there. there's over 40 other transit stops so it's obviously demand for transit in that area. i like to see if economy moving stops further away to a lease find something in that area, probably in the space between dolores park and mission for a shuttle stop. there used to be a stop those being planned one people have talked about the lords and 19. people have talked about the lords and 18th, 18 that church. something in that area i think would really do well to sort of serve the demand for transit in that area for people using the shuttle system. so i also just in general i think density is required for this to work, so they're not part of the city also northern part of the city people talk about canceling the stops that-. i think we also like to see that not happen. to better serve people commuting around this it. thank you
5:38 am
>> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon >> good afternoon. i'm a san francisco rest of you have been living in the bay area since 2000 and here in the city proper since 2009. i just want to say how much i to enjoy and appreciate the commuter shuttle program. it's made a big difference in my life since february of 2015. i started job on the penance will. it was only because of the commuter shuttle program that job was a possibility to me. so i just want to affirm it's a very very beneficial program and i hope it continues for many years. i do want to comment on the recent changes to the shuttle stop locations in the mission neighborhood and how it's impacted me personally. removal of the stop your my apartment which was 18th and charged street is dramatically change
5:39 am
my lifestyle and my commute. i've gone from not using our car only driving on the weekend to now driving to and from the park every single day. this comes at tremendous expense to me from a gas and car maintenance perspective good as well as a tremendous sense of guilt from driving the automobile every single day. i don't want to be a part of the problem with respect to environment so impact in the bay area traffic problem. the much want to be part of the solution it would be my preference to ride a commuter shuttle every day. if possible. so, i'm here to kind of request this group's consideration for restoring commuter shuttle stops in the mission neighborhood. somewhere around dolores park or a comparable location though provide coverage to residents of the neighborhood who may be living east of the park and you want to take advantage of the commuter shuttle program without needing to take a taxi or another form of
5:40 am
transportation to a shuttle stop. i'll leave it there and thank you guys again for your time and consideration. >> thank you. next speaker, please.. >> >>[calling names] >> hi. thank you for the opportunity to speak. my name is scott thompson. i been a mission residence for four years and am a strong supporter of the commuter shuttle program. it helps take thousands of cars off the road every day which is great for the city. i hope we can find ways to get more people to leave their cars at home and utilize options but the commuter shuttle pundit unfortunately, some of the recent changes to the program and the missionary made it a lot harder for me to use could i live at 19th and guerrero and use the stop at 18th and church every day for four years now need to walk all the way to 26 and valencia to get on a commuter shuttle. that's about 2.5 hours a week to my commute. i don't have a car so i don't have the option of switching to
5:41 am
that but i notice a lot of my coworkers and start writing the shuttles less than switching to driving which is obviously not what we want. what specific change made the to program that would help a lot with this is restoring service to the dolores park area. i've seen a couple months ago there was a pending stop on 19th and dolores but then i don't know what happened to that. that would be great. i think dolores park is a great road for this. this 20to pull over. it's not a bike lanes away when not be a safety issue that. this would dramatically improve my life and the lives of other people live in that area and by the commuter shuttles. lastly, i would ask in the future to look at ways we can improve soliciting feedback from people who ride the shuttles. i saw on the agenda today there's a possibility the 25th and valencia evening stop might be removed and moved to cesar chavez if i understand correctly. i get off that stop every day and i'm on your
5:42 am
e-mail list check the website regularly and i do not know that was a possibility i think if you reach out to people ride the shuttle directly in getting the feedback and consideration to these changes would be really helpful and hopefully improve the decisions we make it. they three opportunity to speak. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. my name is jean under resin of richmond district and carless sigh ride muni regularly every day if not more than once a day. mirror to talk about the shuttle bus so they could switch gears for just a minute. this has to do with a quality-of-life issue related to using muni. really focuses on the bus shelters. i've talked to muni to several people i muni at various times at meetings and public discussions about this. so far, nothing has been done. i thought my come and get your attention. they may seem like small matters but really does impact the ability to use the buses within each good one of them has said with a digital
5:43 am
pen outward the digital readout but are frequently inaccurate when recording the bus arrival time. sounds like you already are familiar with that and i don't know what can be done but want you to register a concern about that and hope there is an effort made to coordinate the information on those readouts with the actual arrival time. i know it's possible. but does. buses and other cities do it so maybe there's some way of coordinated this. another issue them a which seems a minor and petty, but it really does have an affect on those of us who rely on the buses has and it's complicated because clear channel are believed runs these shelters. it has to do with the design of the shelter. that resulted in the maps that are important for those of us who need where to go and writing on unfamiliar reach, they are placed so high that you have to be a basketball player for the warriors in order to be able to read where you are going to those on the bus today and in order to figure out where to go from .8 to point b i do, to the seats and were to read the top of the map. looks like you're
5:44 am
also familiar with that. i talked to people at muni about this. i know it's a major redesign but maybe something could be done sooner rather than later to try to make both of these issues take care of both of these issues. your attention to this would be appreciated. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon directors. mark leeson with cancer six if you dive and san francisco. i'm here to talk to you about an aspect of the commuter shuttle program. that has to do with the permitting process itself. as you may be aware, later this week there's going to be an appeal from one shuttle operator concerning the revocation in what we are believing is a violation of the labor harmony ordinance could pass by the board of supervisors last year. i want to say, first of all, we had hundreds of drivers who are members of the shuttle program
5:45 am
and many operators who don't face this kind of situation. but unfortunately, in the case of one operator bowers transportation, we've had numerous e-mails, meetings, facilitated we appreciate by some in the department heads and city families here, but all to no avail. we find ourselves in a situation where this process will be going forward later this week. i'm here to assure you that our union on our side of it is done everything we can to make sure this would not be the outcome. but unfortunately, from our point of view, the operator in question here has done everything to push back and to really not be offering the terms and really the values that the other drivers that are
5:46 am
in this program are enjoying right now. none of us would find ourselves in a situation if this company had decided to mirror what the terms and conditions that those others hundreds of other drivers are enjoying right now. so, we just want to put it out there we have tried to everything we can but unfortunately the case of bowers transportation we don't find any other route to go. that you continue to use our free speech rights to protest the conditions that are happening at that company. >> date. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> if i could put something on the overhead, because i've never used this before?
5:47 am
>> sfgov tv monitors that. let me- >> my name is paula katz. could the club start from when i start talking instead of the time on the overhead, please? thank you. my name is paula katz. the residents of the outer park side near the zoo. i write the caravelle and with ours say our caravel stop. the caravelle rapid project will be on your agenda soon. because our engineering of the curing is this friday. we want to make you aware now that there is great community opposition to this project. i am delivering to you save our caravel stop petition that signed over 1600 caravel writers do who do not want any of our stops are
5:48 am
limited. will be turning in more signatures in the coming months. a copy of one of the additions is on the overhead. ms. boomer said she would scan in the petitions and forward them to each of you. we strongly urge you to look at these petitions and read the e-mail of the comments you will be receiving it they represent real people with real concerns who do not want to lose any of our oh caravel stops and opposed to many of the other aspects of the caravelle project. as can be expected, many of the signatures on petitions from writers whose lives will be negatively impacted if they lose their stops and have to walk in at block or two when they are catching the l and if they shop at the local merchants, library, post office and local safeway which were some incredible reason all are losing their caravel stops. made the signatures however from
5:49 am
l writers were not losing their stops in young healthy writers who use the stops will be removed. many of them told us they were signing the petition because they cannot believe that taken away all the stops which would save less than only 2-3 min. and that it was not worth it compared to the hardship that seniors and people with disabilities would face having to walk that extra block or two. they told us about their aging parents >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. hello. sfmta good minds albert chapter dominator of vinton other business on-been there 33 is good i'm also member of the parkside sunset. i just want to state as paula just said, the
5:50 am
[inaudible] project is rolling out soon. we are requesting that this early implementation with it are going to put out the. roadways and put on the some of the features of the caravelle plan is just a paint them on the road or not to do the hard construction yet and what we want to do is have a six-month time we can evaluate as a neighborhood how we like these changes and how we can live with it or not live with it and hopefully after that, but not done, sf mta can have another series of community meetings where we can vote on these things these features going on our roadways and neighborhood and make the changes we can all live with it and i'll feel comfortable with it the new van scapegoats: leon on a terrible in our community. so once again, please i want to ask you guys to if you can have an evaluation period after six months time that it's out on
5:51 am
the street. so, please take that into consideration. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon my name is dallas-in my family has been on caravelle street just since 1947. it's like sheet-metal and to that through the course of all this work paula said my friend albert, the way that merely has been rolling out with their agenda, i personally have seen they've done to the mission and other neighborhoods and was granted because i drive about 150 miles in the city every week preparing air-conditioners boilers and so and so forth. i really strongly suggest that the moral out plan that they're trying to do and what albert chose suggested is really followed ray closely. i think that's very important because of business owners in san francisco i think it's very important that we are heard and that we contribute a lot to the
5:52 am
city. we really do. we really believe strongly in our community. we really embrace our neighborhood, our community and the people that patronize us. so, again, please take it into consideration. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> hi. my name is [inaudible] i've 30 years expense as a design construction project manager. i am with the save our
5:53 am
caravel stops. my concern today , and in general, is a design elements of the plan. which i think need a little more review. one of them i'm going to explain today. [inaudible] >> ma'am, please speak into the microphone >> thank you. i'm sorry. this amount of accidents have occurred in the last five years that were measured by sf mta. the largest being 19th and caravel. with the busiest stop on the line. now, the plans are to remove one-stop, three stops in total. one inbound and inbound and outbound. one inbound on 21st, one inbound-how come on 17th. causing at least half of these people to now use the 19th ave. stop. already the busiest stop
5:54 am
the most dangerous corner on the line. so, even half of the people that use the outbound and the inbound-outbound taken away either side of 19th could be 1000 more people on 19th and caravel every day. i think that's a safety issue. there are other issues i have it should be considered and reviewed more carefully. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> my name is margaret dietz. i post were moving bus stops around the city including the caravel stops. when i read into the record the text of the save our caravel stops petition was submitted to you earlier with over 6000 signatures. petition to mayor ed lea supervisor katie tang and norman gee. as chairman of the board tom nolan
5:55 am
and the sfmta board of directors, do not take away our code will stop. we ride the caravelle and we pose as of mta's revised proposal to limit 86 stops between west portal and the zoo. outbound on caravelle 35th and 22nd, inbound on caravelle the 24th, inbound and outbound a terrible at 17th and 28, and at 15th. whether a particular stop is eliminated or not we do i think we want to keep all the else stops. currently, the l terrible stops on average every two blocks. under the proposal it will stop every 3-4 blocks. as of mta already plans to save 6 min. each way on the underground between west portal and then asked speeding up the turnaround by 12 min. and that the frequency of the l. sf mta
5:56 am
estimates that other changes to caravelle street and limiting our six stops will save us less than 3 min., less than 6 min. round-trip between west portal and the zoo. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >>hi. thank you for letting me speak. my name is carolyn lee. i been in the city since 1972 and lived in various neighborhoods including the sunset and now cathedral hill. i'm just going to continue the reading of the petition. let's see. market-we believe less than the 3 min. savings each way, 6 min. on iraq that is not
5:57 am
adding to the commits of hundreds elderly disabled and held writers who lose their subject many other writers walk 5-10 min. to get the else to do and we should not have to walk initial 1-2 box because. many writers are elderly and disabled to walk. the blocks were hills. many elevators don't want to look at the block were hills and neighborhood can be dark and cold, foggy and drink it here mostly at night is dark and lonely not a reassuring walk her personal loan. we does not lose our stops are local businesses many many these corners but the safeway at 17th get outside branch library at 22nd with the parkside branch the post office at 28. we do not wonder local merchants to lose customers because the dell longer stops near solution. speed up the altera between the zoo and west portal during rush hour by spinning express rapid shuttle buses were l cars would limit is up to add extra illegals because it is doing on other lines but let us keep our l stop. as a side note, i also within another paper. i feel but many these argument applies also to the 38 geary >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names]
5:58 am
>> her big whiner. san francisco native. welcome [inaudible] community or mta has one unique town. that's civil disturbances at public meetings. the mission cultural center was the latest example of its. there was face up. people were in each other's face. it was ghastly. this is an outcome of mta policy. it occurred on the polk street does. occurred for the potrero street district. caravelle. you name it. now, this is a result of unrealistic planning. now, and mta says the public support said. referring to their supporters the bicycle coalition , vision zero, other groups. and they're funded by mta. so,
5:59 am
this is basically a form of lobbying, a very particular form of lobbying. now, basically, i really am outraged by this because it's working against the public. i think it's really terrible. now, here's some of the mottos of them to get you break it, you own it. mta, portraying next ahead and now in this case with this caravelle run, it's more takeaways and had. you should be thoroughly ashamed of what you are doing. i can only express outrage about it. you really should think it over. i was unit more public commotion as can be your fault and i don't have to hear these terrible people to to these nice mta managers. how preferable. no. you've got to take some responsibility of your off the rails. >> next speaker
6:00 am
>> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. i'm nancy warfel's longtime resident of parkside district. i wish to give you another heads up about the many problems you're having with the terrible price. the neighbors and merchants of most affected by the proposed changes try to tell the mta about opposition without success. over 64 people signed petitions to get ballpark l stop to over 1000 people stopped other petitions protesting the boarding island and resulting loss of parking spaces the new center transit only lanes, the additional traffic signals and were moving the stops. these petition seven submitted to staff months ago and have not
6:01 am
been included on your website responded to by amending your plan. people have first been looks like to petition the government with grievances which we have done. but the mta does not seem to care about our most basic tenet of our democracy. i petitions have been ignored and got into a black hole. the l project is moving swiftly through prescribed procedure but staff have not created to pretend to be responsive to public him. this fight will have the engineering public hearing on hundreds of changes to caravelle street for which the be no transmittal to this board are written or spoken comments. you will get a summary of actions for you to approve most likely in bodied on the consent calendar. give them today to let you know we are not okay with being overloaded letting you approve a project with so many unresolved issues and we are reasonable people we will plan to improve the project and its public acceptance. we propose that caravelle plan, which adopts a soft rollout not the six-month with all the aunts proposed before you start pouring the cement. then, jeff community meetings in our neighborhood and evaluate and vote on acceptance of changes.
6:02 am
this we can do together. will make an approved project that will benefit all of us. thank you for your consideration. we will be back >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. mary a lot of good i'm actually going to read something into the record for some of you can't be here today. her name is alan. she's an 80-year-old lady who lives on toy second avenue. please, keep our l stop to build thing if it ain't broke don't fix it certainly applies to our l stop. currently there's many contented writers who wait on a sidewalk in muni stops
6:03 am
convenient to the resident. the stops must remain. the propose time savings is a reason to remove stops are so small as to be laughable except the hardship that will follow. i speak as one who is within the l from 22nd ave. for 42 years. yes, the 22nd ave. hails from discussed people over the years and i often stop to use my asthma inhaler but what's the corner home on flat land. i can stand on the sidewalk and see both incoming and outgoing l cars could i come home at midnight, stop in front of insecticide chicken is flat. the driver motions me across the street and watches as i arrived safely on the south side of caravelle with my easy downhill stroll. i'm watched over and safe. by the proposed elimination of the outboard 22nd ave. stop your take away my safety. for many years, i've ushered at the opera house arriving very late in the dark. as one of your oldest writers at 80 years, i would be my usual spot by the driver. at
6:04 am
the front of the card, your plan puts me on a concrete island the 24th ave., next to a deserted, i hope playground where caravelle street because two slope towards the ocean. i need to walk in the dark up the hill past the dark library and hope to safely cross post 22nd ave. and caravelle street. i cringe at the thought. caravelle is not a speedway community or cause it to residential and small business street needs to be protected and not [inaudible] thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> could i have before my time isn't going to be an opportunity to comment after the presentation by mta staff on number 13? >> yes. [inaudible] >> yes that's what i was after. thank you. >> mr.-used to be a member of the public transportation committee years ago. spe
6:05 am
>>[calling >>[calling names] >>the community has an interest here. i like the idea of a bus that was busted if you get to a certain point of life of the afternoon adventure the after day is a right on the muni. keep the stops. express buses will work. we have another problem. some of our senior citizens they remember let's combat community, late 1970s, early 1980s. the unique, professional people in the white shirts decided to buy some buses and they have plastic windows and by the time buses went through the washer three times, which was about 2-3 months, you cannot see out
6:06 am
your window. we had that for years and the only reason we got rid, i suppose, because in 1984 we at the democratic convention within a public eyesore for diane feinstein were then made to this beautiful city with all these wonderful guests taking a buses and thinking how can these people write these things. in the same vein, we have a problem now. the 6500 series, the 67 and series, the 7200 series come articulated buses are rattled traps. they make more noise than the 8300 that are 16 years old we got from in 2000. i can only go from where the wheelchair seats are to the cage around the driver. that's all i hear. i don't know what is behind the better driver said the mark ball busters around. yes, i know the streets are in terrible shape. possibly, that's up mayoral problem. we should address
6:07 am
that. we know the streets are in bad shape. we know the buses should be able to take the walls of the street by 10 miles an hour. they should not be rattling more than this 16-year-old buses. the drivers, if there's a union i don't understand the unit needs to step up on this and we also need to step up on this because some big linear tape the drivers that this amount of time laughing at us now but pretty soon the not to be laughing at the end of the units needed. we need to drivers the people that live in the city >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] these are the last two public speakers. >> eileen-long-term district for resident. here is this
6:08 am
caravelle neighbor. here in solidarity with my other caravelle neighbors and merchants. i'm here to support the soft wool out proposal for the l terrible as stated previously. we are assisting the mta adopt the soft rollout strategy to avoid a meltdown similar to that on mission street. i would also like to finish the comments from paul a cap and i quote, many who signed the petition told us about their aging parents and grandparents and elderly neighbors would have a great deal of difficulty doing this good way to san francisco they care more about others than saving a couple of minutes for themselves. eliminating public transit stops is a reduction in service. don't take away our caravelle stops. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] lascaux per person to speak under this period >> good afternoon. we are reaching the point where we don't have design guidelines to
6:09 am
schedule improvements are we designed by complaints. it can't work this way. i mean, physical. as moved in my neighborhood on the l and the pretty far apart when not complaining so those will be a little stop consolidation that will work and save a few seconds each time. that is great. it's good. you have to listen to people but at the point they complained at the meetings, you have to take the time to explain. why are you doing this? now, i would tell you and you know very well, if you save a minute on every line in the system are talking over $20 million a. that's a bunch. the provide service for a lot of other people that really need it. to say you can walk stops have to be only so far part doesn't work. i would remind you again, the 21, crosses oh caravelle. those stops are 1400 feet apart. no one complained. they didn't
6:10 am
1400 feet apart for many years even before the change that's finally going to happen in 2018. presidio drive had 1400 feet a drive apart. it was. it isn't that the peoplesoft apart walk better and faster than the people north of the park. that was done for car driving. okay. but still it works and no one complained too much. it has to be a better way they just driving people, getting [inaudible] must be with to explain each thing. i was all concerned about service to the safeway. we walked to it particular locate a stop probably far side and nearside stopight on 19th amount they cured the sick. what's an extra half walk. my stopple use, and weight [inaudible] some of the people do not make it here. it's going to be moved broccoli. 700 feet. that's like. it's on the level. thank you >> thank you. and most care to
6:11 am
address the board in public comment. seeing none, next item >> mr. burris made a point about the bus shelters and maps been to i can we look into that? [inaudible] thank you >> mr. chairman, consent calendar these items are considered to be retained on active un by single vote unless a member the board of member the public wishes to have an item severed and considered subtly. mr. chairman i received no request from the public that an item be severed >> ms. borden >> i would ask than .97. and can i ask i don't severed a call to attention we have three measures on the consent calendar around speed limits and schools. i just want to point this out publicly for people understand why there's a difference that emf were establishing 25 mi./h at the
6:12 am
school speed limit and then on x were establishing 15. so i had queried if that was because of the nature of the road that the schools are on and i was told, yes, that is the case oh i want to point out because i know under vision zero there's been a big concern for zero is the speed around the school zone. the legal ability to do a 50 mile speed limit but apparently not on the type of street that the school for x isn't it i will collect everyone's attention >> thank you. so the consent calendar planted 10 point hundred is a motion on the consent calendar -10.9 moved and seconded. all those in favor say, aye opposed? director borden two and speak to this? >> yes. i want to the public what 10.9 is so they know what were they are talking about >> sure. 10.9 limit read into the record 10.9 >>[reading code]
6:13 am
>> good afternoon directed.
6:14 am
this item is actually asking for approval of two areas. one is to extend the current contract and the second portion is to issue an rfp. the current contract has been placed for about 18 years but altogether it'll be a 20 year contract. the current contract is structured up multiple function under one vendor. over the last 18 years of managing this area we've identified certain lessons learned and we think there's value in separating one master contract into three service functions. one is basic citation processing, the second one is permit module in the third component is a special collection hard to collect functions. the way it's structured right now a bidder could bid on the rfp for both these basic citation processing and the permitting function, but not on special collection. however, the first-#and what i hear the concerns are run the special collections area. so, the first line of collections is with the basic vendor. it is hard to collect contacts are to collect accounts that we are recommending be sent to a third party. the reason is several. the first is, we believe the special collection firms that
6:15 am
do this better.. that's the record isn't most special collection accounts and rental cars, people visit the city or outside collecting from out-of-state, second, the way that financial structure is set up on special collection is a special collection firms get a percentage of the collection. so, we feel separating the duties so that the special there's no incentive to move accounts into special collections and keep it separated. make the most sense for the agency. about 7% of our revenue is now coming from special collections did so it's a significant source. given the amount of concern i've heard about this area, it makes me more committed to separating the special collections than the rest of the functions in the rfp. so unless you have a specific question happy to answer but i think it's best practices to separate the functions and not have one
6:16 am
vendor to both first-line collection and the special collections. i believe there could be incentive to move stuff to special collections the vendor could earn more money from doing that. that's where we are coming from >> do any other jurisdiction separate this? >> yes, dallas for example is doing that. we've always the leader in the citations area. when we talk to other cities first of all our citation is much larger than most cities. it over $100 million collected from citations. we are enforcement team is very good at this. [inaudible] so, we are like a lot of other syndicate were collections is citations is a large part of our efforts. so there's other cities find this model because of the effort because no other city at the level of collections, level of special out-of-state tour is him, rental car, that we see that go into special
6:17 am
collections. >> it's minor standing out in los angeles they look at separating this out and they're more comparable to us and would cost a lot more money i guess that would be my major concern. you and i have a conversation about this before. i guess i don't understand the rationale for not allowing the provider to bid on all three because you restore the jurisdiction. and it's worthwhile knowing if we could actually save money by having one vendor do all three or just have them done separately but i don't understand the rationale for not allowing anyone to bid on all three portions. >> they could bid on all three bourne not going to give the same vendor the award for the basic collection front and peace and the special collections division batch is something that we believe is not a good model for us to follow. >> even if it's financially better >> well maybe financial better for the firm because the get more money >> even for us as the city? >> we will a valuate them as their fee process but i don't see a scenario where we would
6:18 am
benefit the value added would be better. i just can't envision that particularly given the special collection feels and how much involved over sometime. the first [inaudible] special collections is not their core function. there are firms who do special collections and i think we value more from focusing having a firm that does that and 7% is quite a lot of money that we need more focused attention on special collection efforts. so i don't [inaudible] but i just don't see a scenario where we would be heard. i think be benefited from separating the two functions. >> so were saying the first level collections of stability done by the previous vendor. it just the special collections? >> it's the really hard to collect accounts that we right now are 7% of our-that we want
6:19 am
to try another model. see how it works >> don't we have a really high rate is interesting into missouri collections overall? >> if 7% of special collections we have a high collection rate, yes on the first line, it's a hard to collect stuff, rental cars people from coming from out-of-state. those kind of vehicle type exchange, uber and stuff like it. it's much harder to collect an incentive is for the firm to get a percentage of the collection. they're more likely to identify accounts and special collections. >> but when the incentive anybody when the incentive be across all firms of those?. >> it is only doing special collections. so if we separate the two functions they would be one firm doing both soul that went from when not have the incentive to move items from
6:20 am
the first level collection to special collection. not sure from articulated this well but for example if i run a company and i knew i could make more money by moving accounts into special collections i'm more less likely to do a good job on the first collection effort because i know i would- >> i'm not saying it's happening still the vast majority are being settled. >> exact. >> it doesn't seem likely to me a lot of percentage being pushed to special collections of the work is. if i'm clear you are saying that the same could bid on all three portions of the contract and our position is we wouldn't take all three but people could bid on all three? >> people could bid also. the way it's currently structured we would allow them to the permitting portion as well as the basic citations part. when not want to use the same firm to win the awards for the first collection portion and the special collections portion. that's the way it's structured.
6:21 am
i would assume that the current vendor with 93% of the business and do a good job of responding to the rfp puts the permitting module in the special collection firms who specialize in that effort focus on that area. for our agency i could tell you that mr. blr eggs in one basket is such a large effort that to separate that out like this system is down, everything is just a variety of risk issues we've looked at. so, that's my recommendation. to do it separately and try different model. >> so i guess it's your position the current system we have for 20+ years has not been working effectively? >> in various areas were not quite please with the way the current system is working. >> just one question, if we approve this and you do split
6:22 am
this out, and get the three different sets of dates that, if two director borden's point, it looks like we are going to end up paying more, do you at that point have the ability to reconsider how you award the contract? >> sure. absolutely we could do that. we have three firm to recovery confident went to the basic citations when doing the permitting, do the special collections. project two contracts but i don't see a scenario where we have one put all our eggs in one basket with one contractor for all three. >> i'm happy to make a motion >> i do question. what would be wrong with letting apply for the holding? zero comes out? with the make their own case. >> i don't to raise expectations of the vendor that we would consider a scenario and give all 321 firm. that was my concern because i just don't see a model where i would be comfortable giving special
6:23 am
collections effort with 7% two- for the permitting and base to go to one vendor but i don't believe the vendors on and allow them to bid on all three and end up with a scenario where -that's the way restructured it >> i'm getting off location of the 7% collectors. do these people call you harass you and call you is that what we are employing? is that what it is? >> i'm sorry? >> are these the people that call you at home mom to repossess your house all that stuff. is that what were talking about?. i don't know about that but it's identified mostly special collections and databases we don't have access to across the state across the country. mostly rental cars they get a ticket they leave the jurisdiction and so it's a lot of work to try to track these people down. we would rather have firms specializing that do that rather than having the base band vendor spend time
6:24 am
doing that effort when they could do a job at the base of his. >> sounds like a euphemism to me. director driscoll you get to weigh in on this? >> yes. a few things. first, i'm surprised the level of interest in this topic of administration. as you know, we have been seeing increased ratings from the credit rating agency based on sound financial management practices that we put in place. where we try to, as we enter into contracts would look at other things were doing across the agency, the two best practices emerging practices, ways to reduce risk, reduce conflict and make sure that we are maximizing value for the agency as i think we are required to do. the fact that were changing this is less about this a big problems they can we just see a better
6:25 am
practice to reduce risk. i think we have in order for enforcement to work, we need to have credible ways of making sure that people pay when they violate our parking and traffic laws and that's what,, in part, this is about. we believe this inherent conflict when you have the same people at the front and carrying through this lifecycle. it's possible there may be higher costs by separating this out, but we believe it also potentially higher revenues because both the citation processing contractor and the special collection contractor with greater incentive to collect the money that is owed to the city and county of san francisco. so, the great majority of people as director borden points out later citations and we want to make
6:26 am
if they are such that the rest of the people do as well. we think this a better and more sponsor way to do so and that's why were recommending it. >> website, director >> it's a board decision. you understand that? is there a motion on the? moved and seconded. any further discussion? >> mr. chairman before you do that you want to see if his numbers of the public to address it >> other members of the public picture to address the board on this topic? >> state your name for the record, please >> nancy-i think mr. reiskin for his comments. i been involved in auditing firm is my professional life and i'm refresh to hear exactly what you said about separation of duties sound management practices of evaluating risk. it's not a good idea to have all these functions in one basket. the presenter was very
6:27 am
delicate in being very nice to answer you ms. borden and i hope you're convinced that the right thing to do is to different companies checks and balances. >> anyone else care to address the board? seeing none, i think we have a motion. all those in favor say, aye opposed? the ayes have it. thank you. next item >> mr. chairman that concludes your consent calendar and will move on to the regular count. item 11. >>[reading code]the consent calendar has been passed. sorry. >> [inaudible] >> the chairman did ask the members of the public was to address the board. we did not get any speaker cards. >> next item, please >> item 11, >>[reading code] >> i'm going to ask tom
6:28 am
maguire director of streets come forward. were joined by some of our colleagues from the planning department. mr. mcguire was at the planning commission last week doing kind of a reciprocal presentation on general transportation to the planning commission. this is now a general presentation on land-use planning to this commission in preparation for our joint planning and mta board commission on thursday. >> good afternoon. as director reiskin said this preparation for thursday's joint meeting. last thursday we presented to the planning commission giving an overview of the transportation system and mta's primary strategic goals and programs. i'm now pleased to introduce gil kelly from the san francisco planning manager director of citywide planning. planning department and he and his effort to give us a presentation on transit venues establishment in san francisco. >> good afternoon mr. kelly and welcome >> thank you. chairman nolan
6:29 am
and vice chair brinkman board numbers and director reiskin. i'm going to take you into a little different room of conversation and talking about fees and collections and even moving transit stops. we are thinking about the long-range transportation system for the city. our main presenter i will introduce in just a moment but i want to set the stage a little bit in that you'll hear more about this on thursday in the joint session with the planning commission, but it's an exciting project that we are just now initiated. you'll hear more about it on first. so this preparation for that. the planning commission was delighted to tom, and speak to them. last week and give them a briefing overview of what's going on in the transportation world. today, you'll get the reciprocal presentation what's happening when not simply ban land use the population and job forecast how we've approached the big picture planning in the
6:30 am
past and was in front of us. all introduce joshua in just a moment who is our chief planner when it comes to the growth management issues and so forth. but, i want to preface this by saying we believe this is a moment in time that's extremely important to look out into the future. we have an unprecedented level of population growth since the early postwar period both in terms of jobs and population. we are seeing a very rapid pace of change and transformation of what san francisco is and there are deep questions in the community right now about this corridor be able to live here how people get around the weather will be able to finance infrastructure adequately, whether we will the house people adequately and so forth. this is a thick nest of issues and challenges that we are planning department the time to address along with our partners.
6:31 am
to that end, we are kind of focused in this work on the transportation piece. so, will be looking primarily on that on how relates to some of these other big moving parts in the urban development system. it's not to take away from the near-term immediate action being taken by every agency every day. but i think the question were provoking here is will those added to the kind of future that we want in 20 heck 30 years. so, josh will give you a presentation in a moment that will tee up some of those questions with the information about time for your questions but will get into the bigger picture of planning looking forward on thursday and i want to knowledge director reiskin along with his counterparts, john pam and julie chang and representatives of the mayor's office it as an oversight body over the work that's being done a staff level by the three transportation agencies together. that work is being
6:32 am
coordinated and managed by teresa espinosa, who is here as well today. tracking this conversation it shall be the primary presenter along with-of your staff on thursday. so, again, kind of a two-part and we want to focus in on bringing you up to speed with long-term population job housing and land use trends. today if that's clear all introduce joshua will give you the presentation. thank you >> good afternoon. joshua-with planning staff. if i could get the slides up, please? thank you. just to recap were here to set the stage for you and give you a broad overview to give you a good understanding of the trajectory of land use planning and growth in san francisco over the last few decades. it's really important to understand just a brief historical context
6:33 am
and know where we are today and where we are heading. so, what i've done is broken out the template past interview themes that have really probably in my view encapsulated the trajectory in different areas of planning in san francisco. that have really brought us to where we are today. the first the modern era starts in the late 60s early 70s. it's when bart first opened in the city muni metro market street. also, the board of supervisors adopted the first transit first policy. this is really an arrow where willie san francisco was starting to grow internally after it had reaches maximum extent in the late 40s and downtown was really starting to grow robustly. this is really the era of bringing in the growth of the downtown try to keep it from spilling into adjacent neighborhoods that the chinatown or the tenderloin brother jason neighborhoods. julian era of san francisco grappling with its protection of its cherished neighborhoods. as well as accommodating some
6:34 am
amount of growth on the job site in downtown and i was the focus for a good decade and a half to the mid-80s, dated with the adoption of the downtown plan. it also brought us other policies and voter initiatives like the park shadows ordinance pm which provides an annual limit on office growth in the city. as well as the was a ordinance passed by the voters mandated waterfront land use plan. this is the killing of the industrialization of the northern waterfront and what became of that. so, then after that there was a hiatus terms of land-use planning in the city for a good 15 years. really starting in the late 90s throughout the 90s we did have a transportation side, we had great successes. muni metro expended in the first anchor mental expansion with market in the next fourth and king and the construction of the light rail. at the same time at the federal level we had tea-21 words but a focus on transit oriented development to plan
6:35 am
for transit oriented. becker cited in a perfect storm with boom and the live-work phenomena we had a lot of scattershot housing being thrown all run our industrial districts around the city and a lot of concern about our rebuilding the neighbors. i was serving him with transit and parks and everything. so with these two movements in hand the prime determinant city reinvigorated its competent planning function and we had this real explosion of housing orientated neighborhood complete neighborhood plans start with a better name its program them to eastern neighborhoods as well as several other key opportunities that also coincided with us at. the base realignment federal program which handed over the shipyard and treasure island to the city as well as the hope six became old sf program. so, this team continues today. projects going on and continue to work on all sf program. the new neighbor programs and the [inaudible] as well as looking at our neighborhood and what we
6:36 am
call the market octavia area. that again that program the focus of this effort had been about creating complete neighborhoods as opposed to what was seen at the time in the 90s is just letting housing happen as opposed to creating neighborhoods could sue the better neighborhoods program reinvigorated that that's also the birth of our conference of implementation plan for neighborhood plans. he said option of impact fees associate with all these plans and then go interagency partnership to implement these plans. whether that's transit improvements, open space, libraries and the whole suite of improvements. that sort of brings us to the next era which was not purely about housing but the mission date in the late 90s with the first shot across the bow in terms of what is the next beyond in terms of job growth in san francisco. solely, downtown starting to fill up in terms of the conception of what it is the downtown.. obviously
6:37 am
they should they was a unique opportunity. it really starting only about 5-6 years for the city started grappling with and looking at plans in terms of how to grapple with the city's job growth. that's economic diversity. the transbay plan, looking at how do we finalize the downtown probably ultimate stakeout lasted quite a long time. then, looking further south with the central summit plan,, which you probably hear about in the coming months. which is looking at the growth of the south of market among the central subway line which will open in a couple years and you'll hear more about today but some projects coming up along the eastern seven waterfront in mission rock and pier 70 and the central waterfront. billy grappling with the city and not just the city says city of office workers but a city of
6:38 am
industrial businesses and other nonprofits and other activities make it real whole diverse economic workplace. so a lot of these digitally eastern neighborhoods and southeastern neighborhoods really where the rubber meets the road on these policy questions about how we not just accommodate both in terms of housing but as well as how we accommodate our economic activities. billy, the fourth and final thing is on the present everybody's minds today locally statewide maybe not as much national but the regional housing crisis. in the bay area. the neighborhood is. it's not a citywide crisis really a regional one. billy, for the first time since the 1970s is really the state to talk about housing policy. i say the late 70s purse issues like rent control, ellis act, and all these issues did not until recently has there been any action even discussion on existed believe san francisco we as you see we been doing this plan on neighborhood by neighborhood basis. how should this neighborhood grow? that we talk about citywide housing policy issues in the last couple of years we said adopted
6:39 am
legislation legalizing in law units citywide police terms of those already exist in the way of legislation pending in front of the board 12 accessory towing units citywide bell be a landmark move and last week we had the adoption of an affordable housing bonus to allow 100% for the housing projects, to, to get bonuses. so, this is really kind of the topic that's on everyone's mind. not that the other ones are not continuing in our trajectory and discussions but this one is sort of survey would scrapping our attention. we operate obviously in a context of such as well happening in san francisco. this greater factors and influences influencing our work and the trajectory and factors that san francisco has to deal with. certainly, urbanization using all stories and read studies about how even as a nation hiding interest in
6:40 am
returning to cities and whether it's millennial's or baby boomers are just the population at large there's a greater interest in city living and that bears out in our population trends. survey, clustering of talent most notably wealth and small number of cities around the country has been a particular issue with our housing crisis here. as well as issues of, change addressing our issues from a regional basis and so the public health whether the vision zero or just general active lifestyle. that's certainly driving our planning actions that could sue will run through some numbers quickly to give you a sense of where we have come and where we are. san francisco since 1980 was kind of the bottoming out of san francisco population. there was a slide coming out of world war ii. i think around 1950 and then we almost lost couple
6:41 am
hundred thousand people to 19 agent that really we've growing fairly steadily since then by about 25-50,000 people protected that the last five years we've doubled that. we've added 50,000 people just in the last 5-6 years along. the result as you'll see from the housing numbers in a minute, we been done to find our housing stock. will the people living in each unit because we are not producing much housing to keep up with population growth get it more employed people per household. whereas, few decades ago you that one revealed over one working person know where multiple working people per household. san francisco has picked up its pace in terms of regional growth. as you can see from these numbers, from the 70s-80s, city would produce about 6% of the reasons housing. that's picked up steadily with each decade culminated with the last three years we been producing over 15% all the regions housing. on a population side is actually even more substantial. while the first planned area adopted
6:42 am
in 2015 projected san francisco would grow by 1000 households in 30 years, we grew the household side by only about 7.5 thousand on the chair population some point we do it 50,000 people in apartment 30% of the population growth has been inspecting the we well outpaced these those projections such at that draft on the street today shows a potentially growing by about 100,000 households per 24 is made by potentially as 140,000 households. by 2040. it just shows you are housing pipeline. if over 60,000 housing units either entitled under construction, or in the permitting stage. you can see the primarily concentrated in the southern eastern quadrant of the city. if you to align for market street to mission street everything within a
6:43 am
boundary but 75% of all the housing units would be in that area. just interesting note is that fully 50% of our housing pipeline is a small handle very master-planned project. by treasure and. [inaudible] unique challenges in terms of infrastructure building up these places are really almost blank slates in terms of transportation parks and everything that comes with that. on the jobsite, we are the bay area has been growing more robustly than the state or nation is over number of years. it has reached sort of milestones in terms of total jobs in the region that have not been reached before. just like on the house inside san francisco has really picked up its growth share of the region. on average, we've gone over this long period about 6500 jobs a yet but if you look at the recent decades and if you look at the recent 5-6 years is double that again. the pace
6:44 am
that's really unprecedented. in terms of the regional productions, similar story. the plane banner area adopted in 2013 thought we would grow about 190,000 jobs were 70% of the region by 2040. we well outpaced up your we've taken 20% of all jobs achieve more than half of all the 30 year growth in just five years. so, not surprisingly the projections for 2040 are being revised and showing us growing by the detroit 250,000 jobs by 24. as you can see the pipeline of commercial space is pretty robust. about 23 1/2 million square feet is entitled were under review and no provide space for parents about 80,000 jobs. just another note similar to the housing picture,. the location of particularly office space and job space in general
6:45 am
has shifted since the 70s and 80s and is accelerating in this direction for the first 15-20 years after the adoption of the downtown plan three quarters of all the office space in the city was entitled in the downtown. the next seven years was cut in up to 40% and currently, only 10% of the city's office that's proposed untitled is in the downtown get the rest is on the south of market in areas south and east along the waterfront. willie, the downtown is reaching the sort of full buildout under the conception. this clearly presents new challenges particularly in transportation basis to address where [inaudible] so, that brings us to our current ongoing talk a little bit in the first part about some of the projects that we are planning efforts undertaken whether central soma southern waterfront the hub but we really try to coalesce to work program into key challenges that we shape our
6:46 am
focus and our aspirations. the first is advisory equity and inclusively . this is challenging the basic soul of the sitting see that is where the paramount challenges for the city. access and mobility. this is clearly your--and we talked a lot about those challenges within four. resiliency and sustainability. climate change we are a coastal spit zero arise presents unique challenges for some other heavily populated part of our city for waterfront and transportation infrastructure. lastly, place making. building places for people whether that's neighborhoods groaning or not growing. we train our attention to making places the people we want to inhabit good taking these things we have five place initiatives. that most of our work falls within few part of the city's we focus on the market street corridor and the neighborhoods in public spaces that hang off that corridor and make it pacific
6:47 am
commons that we all hope and aspire it would be. the city of neighborhoods which is really looking at neighborhoods brilliant many which are not growing robustly the way that others are. trying to make sure that everyone can meet their daily needs within a walking to my short walk or bike short transit ride. they can sure housing policy support the diversity our households reflect. the next-generation sf is kind of a coin of a term to reflect the growth management aspect of our. promote the sums up these part of the city where you see a lot of growth happening but making sure nudges planning for growth in terms of housing and jobs and making sure the live transportation system, open space systems, educational systems, community facilities are really doing huge amount of growth and relatively concentrated area that need good we talked a little bit about the waterfront and bridging the bay. we are really trying to engage in a much more robust level with our partners
6:48 am
in oakland and san jose and really looking at how we collectively solve some of these problems and regional basis engaging with plane banner and a area and are [inaudible] in a much more deliberate way. then we have in the past. so, that concludes my presentation at happy to take any questions and look forward to dialogue on thursday and beyond >> thank you very much for the presentation. especially appreciate the regional considerations. i'm hoping that this moves forward were on touch with our regional partners on this side of the bait and north of the bait and south of the bid. are we working with them at all on this. is i think around renault working with the other areas? >> in terms of planned bay area itself were in close dialogue with our partners in
6:49 am
both shaping the projections and making sure that large extent they reflect how we view the growth prospects of the city not just throwing out numbers that may be unrealistic or misallocated as well as providing lots of comments on the transportation packages that go along with those. even separately, we reached out to planning directors in oakland and san jose. we were just on a field trip to san jose just a couple weeks ago meeting with our staff and talk about our common issue could were doing that and how it was more formal processes did >> so to think about the immediate neighbors like brisbane for example. high-speed rail. their idea to build storage facility there. having conversation i don't know what's going on with that at all and i don't know if they have the ability to condemn the property. i suppose they do. but that's optically neighborly. >> yes. we have a particular project as you probably know in the planning department to look at the arrival high-speed rail. often referred to as bad or railyard alternatives study. we
6:50 am
are in contact with brisbane on that project. this sort of future many ban in brisbane is in question but they're going through their own planning and domicile review process but we stay in contact with them on that. we are really reaching out to a number of communities on the region on the speaker transportation question. so, open is reforming a transportation department right now for example. the kind of beefing up their ability to participate. thank you. vice chair brinkman >> great presentation. i've been in this city long enough to really understand how the planning department helps us shape the city. i remember mr.-given a presentation to walk sf ages ago about how the
6:51 am
bank on hill and downtown plan was going to restore the look of the hill in the valleys of downtown known across the bay bridge there they appear we actually have done it. i think a lot of people don't realize with incredibly long-term view you have to take in your department. i was getting really nervous when i was looking at this and looking at the sort of southern bayfront housing units coming online until i got to the next presentation which showed how we are going to do without in the transportation. it's great. it's good information and i'm so happy having this presentation and working together with planning to make sure were covering all these things. the last thing i just want to say is i will also appreciate the planning departments focus on what people need in the neighborhoods and neighborhood services and place making. in my neighborhood, we squared) section for nine months and left such a hole in the neighborhood. there's nowhere and where people go further evening walk or go to just watch the dogs plate or hang out. i appreciate the sharper focus and the experience you all have with that. so, thank you >> director borden >> i have a question have we done mapping
6:52 am
like you do with planning how our dissertation overlays how we done with transit and ridership and infrastructure maps with plan. i think that's one of the challenges we see today with the stressors in the system because we've not looked at how that correlates. i've never seen a presentation like that. does one exist? >> personally i have not seen it. it doesn't mean it doesn't exist but certainly part of the connect sf after i'm sure we will be part of the dialogue and provide a background context >> to that point, we looking at i know were moving forward and obviously making a lot of improvements and symptom would talk about later. with existing neighborhoods, but have we done i think i know in each of these development agreements and plans there were infrastructure for transportation requirements
6:53 am
that in some cases with development agreements that are have to be put into place and sometimes their money to put in the funds to up on those projects. with area plans like market and octavia good have we done a brief refresh to look at that considering doing oh that we have the transportation improvements were making today we know we have 50% of our pipeline is part of major development actually to come online for another 10 in some cases 20 years. how are we making sure we are facing everything? looking at that bigger picture of with community plan like the short term focusing on the projects window need to deal with right now and also making sure the long-term were ready when we finally get the last 10,000 units in the shipyard or over in [inaudible] >> but i would say he and all that jill give the correct answer, but i would say is first of all for the large common projects the
6:54 am
transportation improvements are phased based on the development. soon the candlestick shipyard hunters point plan for example the transportation plan their triggers and targets where we need to work with the development to essentially build the transportation infrastructure as the development happens same the treasure i look at st. luke's and with [inaudible] but i think you're getting a kind of the deeper question that is josh said, we done these individual plans but i don't think we really have taken a citywide view terms of what you are saying of overlaying that map, i think that spot on in terms of what we need to be doing and that's effectively what we started this long-range transportation planning process that were going to discuss on thursday because to be honest, from my standpoint will done in the past aside from the development by the government were neighborhood by neighborhood efforts, such as
6:55 am
to the transit effectiveness project look at somewhat of the existing system that optimizes them a call for projects. who's got an idea of something? and people throwing we should do a subway here we should do a project there. but it hasn't been-and those are analyzed in this lot of evaluation that goes into that but i haven't seen in recent decades the we've done this citywide view. we looked at current system we have much as many of their the transit providers in the bike network, road network and overlaid that with the existing demands on the system and projected for future growth to see where the stressors, if they're not now, then a become upon students are planning for it. that, for me was why we started this long-range process because i don't that we are done that to the extent we needed to on the citywide regional basis that's what you
6:56 am
be hearing about thursday. just the beginnings of that. it's a tall task it a lot harder than doing it in a very focused weight >> i think it's important because having been on a plane we were always approve the project because the transit waited developments. which is what we want, but the flipside is the transportation infrastructure is taxed, no most of our developers in south of market were doing a lot with not to say that hello street were other neighborhoods are not important because they're growing other way but why 50% of her development is happening in the south of market district yet the majority of our time is spent focusing on other areas. i'm not saying those areas are not important but we haven't quite lined up our graduate of fact were going to all these people in a place and not easy
6:57 am
ways to get them around. it kind of spills into the commuter shuttles and all these other kind of stressors were seen on the system today because were not looking out. look forward to being part of helping to great his larger vision because i think that's exactly what's been lacking and how where we are today i think the hard thing is thinking about what were talking about the caravel geary street is and just think about today but think about 20-30 years where we need to be on the other side of things so we don't have to say, gosh, we should have anticipated that were good have development or whatever. and now we need infrastructure. i think that's kind of like what i think it's intentional process we helpful to the community at large to see the vision for where things are going the more we can overlay window to violence are coming here or populations going there, how are we adjusting i think the better lens we have one more look at all these individual projects and how we move forward with them. >> if i could, i would just say director reiskin did give the right answer. the only thing i
6:58 am
would add is that as you're alluding to the planning commission also struggles with the same kind of question. they spend notably a small amount of their time looking at the long-term big picture and mostly dealing with development project. so this board and that commission to take a step which i think only happens once in a generation so this is a great moment to seize. the one other thing at new hear more about this in the coming presentation on the southern bayfront, there was a little bit at eight ha ha moment how we might build the bridge between now with these new developments come in and memory have this big picture in place. that is kind of a three bucket approach to negotiate particularly negotiated transportation contribution to those development agreements. the one bucket meeting on-site or nearsighted that need improvements. some of those same either neighborhoods as
6:59 am
well as the site. a second bucket that goes with augmenting suite and doing other things with the system that we know we need now in the short term the third bucket and hobbies apportioned all the lies are subject to ever negotiation, but a third bucket to make sure these development circuitry bidding at least to the study work and the design work the upfront work whatever comes out of this big picture planning work we are doing. so here more about that >> thank you. dir. ramos >> i was just going to say that i'm deeply grateful for the opportunity to hear from you folks about this. i think i'm constantly surprised by how our best projections are always less than what we could have imagined and i think about what our system and the hardship it must've been on folks in the past to have dug the tunnels we
7:00 am
dug and laid on the rails that we did and what have you. i can imagine the world were san francisco today without these things. i think that it's important that we think about just not even within account of speculation, just looking at where we've been in the past and thinking about the kind of growth we've expense in the past and that what we can anticipate in the future to guide our decisions. i would hope that when we are talking to the community about any these changes that we been talking about lately, but it's moody forward were any of the new projects, that we couch them in these terms so that folks understand to director brinkman point talk about accommodating the future and try to keep ourselves from buying ourselves in a place
7:01 am
where our sister property on the point of real efficiency for anyone or have been use patterns are sprawling and not really sustainable not really having any real sort of conductivity and cohesion with the community that they hold, and i really want to stress and hope that-i've seen presentations in the password to my p2 slides carpet 2-3 sides talking about here is where we are in your is where we might grow in the future, but the slides and some of these charts that you presented today are really compelling and particularly, have exceeded projections that we had in the past. i would hope there's an effort afoot on the mta's behalf to make sure that we were talking about changing the color valve or the mission whatever it might be, that we are taking it within this, with this in mind where we are doing these things with this in mind. >> thank you. rector other
7:02 am
members of the public who wish to speak spirit >> yes we have one member of the public who turned in a speaker card. >>[calling names] >> good afternoon director. howard strasser. i think that's a family get-together with planning. then using transit of course must work together. our member being concerned about the housing jobs balloted for the previous mission bay but to go back to some of the things that might be the use should've shown you on this. they should have shown you the growth in cars number of cars per family number of cars per household total number of cars in the city. to go back with director ramos said i was to that chart from 19 6920 of to start and what to we want that the idea for 2000 but that was a long time ago. if you look at the 2040 how many cars are we going to have we have in the past
7:03 am
because you doing so many things to reduce the number of cars. does it work it's good to see that. the other thing that i would say is when the great things that planning did for us in the 60s, was putting parking limits on office building spirit well, our building offices whether on a parking limits and the providing one or two full parking places for thousand square feet. the limiting the court it was .2 parking spaces per square foot in them sending you a paper shortly on that. that's very important. you'll never win if there's corresponding to the circuit you're worried about course pouring in and correspondent. the other thing happening you look at these numbers. we have 62,000 new units in the pipeline , 80 some odd thousand new jobs that were not keeping up. the housing affordability thing and this is talking to planning, two. housing affordability is core to get further out of hand. so, we both have to work you have to work together to
7:04 am
make this happen and bring us the city we still want to live in. >> think. anyone else care to address the board? >> tom gilbert e. i've been there 27 years. the building has been there 27 on three months. they opened the couple months before i joined. the e, line the third line we that the baseball game. we've got the paschal stadium and 650,000 ft.2 of office space and we are going to have the giant plan, with 11,000 workers and 1500 apartments. we have a crunch over there. i would like to see the overlay. i don't think the 15 line can handle it. the t
7:05 am
line can handle this anymore. we may need a completely different line going into that area because it's easy to put -this was the one that caught my attention. i don't know if you can get a close-up of that spirit all the red dots on the eastern neighborhood and ugly the eastern neighborhood plan that took seven years to finalize finalized in 2008. i think that's one is in tatters right now. but the dots, if you look at >> [inaudible] it's it easy to build but we don't have the streets the avenue were the design for this good transit at all. and what kind of behind on
7:06 am
it. i don't know if i much we can do. that's what i'm saying. we have a juggernaut coming. thank you >> think. an interest care to address the board on this? come forward, please. >> again this is directed toward the planning people. >> giving a moment, please. >>i do wonder if they're planning for with the end of road. there has to be a limit. is not and was it does not go on forever. as previous gentleman pointed out, there's perhaps a limit on how you can transport these people. is there a limit on water? is a limit on other resources? has the planning commission looked at how far you can go? >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> nancy-as long as you're
7:07 am
thinking the way you are appreciate this on the overlay mastered 01 overlay of the sea level rise. the maps i've seen scare the crap out of them. this is said. we have lot of important housing projects in the area that's going to be club club club have looked at: our plans for a long time about bayview-hunters point and it's a golden opportunity to house and transfer people into a lovely beautiful area. but the point is, we have to get things right in terms of where the land is and where the water is going to be. i don't hear anything about new lines if there could be underwater. let's make sure we understand that when you're going to propose in i'm going to pay for is can actually be something that's going to be there even with we have to do elevated things like that happen chicago. >> thank you. anyone else care
7:08 am
to address the board seeing none, mdm. clerk >> mix item mr. gimenez presentation and discussion regarding the southern bayfront strategy. >> thank you for the last presentation >> is to chairman just for the record no members of the public was to address you on that matter. >> good afternoon chairman of nolan and members of the board. carly pain from the sfmta . please do introduce presentation on the southern bayfront and mike martin from,, he's a project director at the office of economic and workforce development to kick off the presentation, which i think could not have been more vertically queued up by the previous conversation. i think
7:09 am
would answer and raise probably even more questions. >> good afternoon >> afternoon rectors. mike martin office of economic and workforce development, e ms. aims, and it is very opportune to be talking with you about this topic after the item we just heard about. the court is immune from the broad macro citywide historical and future view to one specific place where these challenges of growth are really being seen and hopefully being worked on i had of one they're coming for you before developments. i'm here on behalf of director development in my office can rich get to my colleague did my office generally leads negotiations with the project sponsors major development agreements which as you all know as they come before you boast in their ability have to do with getting the maximum
7:10 am
public benefits out of each project in exchange for the entitlement they get to bills from their proposal in the city. often time, these are very involved very challenging very complex transactions though i think what we are trying to do in the southern base context is look ahead in this number coming forward and how can we not only deal with all them coming through but hopefully use them to maximize the benefits back to the city by having a coordinated strategy. if i can get the slides, please? so, this slide is meant to give a little context. when people talk with the waterfront of san francisco, there's a lot of different parts of the waterfront and of different futures. if you start in the far left of this diagram, the bottom left, you see ocean beach in the orange-red color. we are to perceive as can change except by natural reasons the advancing sea level and how we safeguard that part of the city is camino ongoing
7:11 am
conversation as well. as we move clockwise or on a while we get to the federal lands of the presidio and the golden gate national recreation area back parkland at marina green. all of these are protected by federal state and local law and we don't see a ton of development there were changes they are either. we move to the blue continuing clockwise and this is the classic san francisco waterfront the people conjure in their heads. this is the port of san francisco are largely pier's northeastern waterfront where there may be changes but in many cases this is very buildout and obviously the huge changes is very closely watched and potentially controversial. but when we get to the bottom to the yellow, it's basically the lan along the bayfront south of china basin, we see a part of the city where that's part of it is industrial past but definitely ticketed for a lot of growth in
7:12 am
the near term and we saw that in the last item as well in the overlay maps. this part of the city ultimately what we are trying to do is think about it cohesively. to think about it this is the place where there's some consensus that growth can happen if managed correctly, we want to think about what is going to mean not only for the people coming here in the jobs coming here but for the people that already live here. it's hard to see because the close captioning but right now in this yellow shaded areas and 36,000 people already living nearby already 22,000 people working nearby. so the idea that we want to get across today is how can we channel this incoming investment to address not only the growth but also the people that are already there interactive hopefully lifted up by the growth. so, this map shows a
7:13 am
series of master plan projects that are either in the pipeline were already approved along this waterfront. moving from the top of this map in the mission rock project a giant plot eight. the warriors arena recently approve the pure pier pier 70 [inaudible] energy site . the bluish square denotes the active industrial area of pier 80, 84 and 96. those will continue be industrial areas. we know those uses and jobs are needed in the cities of those areas won't be touched. but as we continue south, we see the pg&e the former hunters point site india basin project the shipyard candlestick project south of there an executive part, as you round out the map and the southbound towards the city line. so, altogether, all of these projects represent 20,000 new households. our goal for the waterfront this entire southern bayfront is to make
7:14 am
sure 33% of those are affordable to below-market rates, which would be about 6600-67 a new affordable households with a neighbor preference program of 40% going to people in the local area or super supervisors district. that significant portion about 3000-2-3000 new affordable units available for people here already. we think that's a critical part of this plan and put those pieces together. in addition, there's an additional 520 acres of open space either in process were being put in place shipyard or planning and about once. obviously, that's a huge proportion i think it's happening in golden gate park and basically, the major amount of new open space coming into the city in the near-term. i want to-this slide zooms in the projects not yet been approved. so, that basically means the mission rock project among pier 70 energy site pg&e and india basin. all these are coming
7:15 am
forward over the next couple of years. all at different points in the process. summer and ceqa some are getting it. but ultimately, when we saw this map combined with the , which is a timeline, i think our office realize that. as these projects come together, and one 2016 up your we generally think 27-2018 will see probably all five those projects come forward for approvals. we want to get ahead of the conversation about what we need is projects to do in a public benefit basis. so we initiated internal city agency means with a variety of agencies on number of which you seem to hear between your agency planning department landowner agency like performer rita bauman agency as well as port of san francisco. rec and park department. so all of these agencies have been meeting regularly to start thinking about what it is work on to create the framework for all these negotiations so we
7:16 am
can ask for things and negotiate for things with all these developers in a way that creates a larger vision in a way that often time you see in a plan from the planning department but because each of these are individual negotiation that in it that together in different way. i guess what i would say is today you see the star at the bottom. today is part of our first sort of public effort to get out in front of boards and commissions work yourself during these items as well as community the areas around these projects to solicit your ideas and feedback about how you are doing this so that we can get ahead of these negotiations and present something that's hopefully well thought through and clear and ready for fine tuning consider major changes because we have not seen a very critical need.
7:17 am
so, this slide is a little busy but i think it's meant to show the tactics we are trying to use to improve the situation were improve the agreements were able to strike. the top row of circles are the key tools that we have entered a bauman agreement to bring resources to these public benefits. development agreements can take impact fees are already required could also negotiate additional conjugations from developers and target things we know will need additional funding for the kind of impact that are common with the government are yet not being addressed other medication under ceqa. in addition, there's other public finance tools the we are definitely deploying at the port of san francisco and mission rock and pier 70 that we think and more efficiently deliver capital improvements and therefore try to grow the pie what each of these projects can do. these are now those special taxes which a voluntary tax that a landowner levies upon itself or herself that goes towards public facilities such as parks, streets open
7:18 am
space transit facilities, etc. in addition, there's also what's called infrastructure financing district tax increment which is the successor to the redevelopment agency tax increment which is basically saying the growth in taxes from the beginning of the development and its growth can be put back into that development or back into things that improve the infrastructure around that department. the board of supervisors adopted a policy that the increment that's been made available for the port projects will go back into that port projects and once those poor projects with intersection for those projects paid off the board's policy says that money would then go to improve the cities see what could again think about the sea level rise consideration those mentioned earlier. similarly, the special taxes if they landowner chet chooses to levy
7:19 am
a fund to him or herself same dynamic applies to it once those are paid with the initial infrastructures. october 30-40 years, the taxing authority would want to keep out their great undue source again, to pay for sea level rise adaptation. so what were saying each of these components as a marketing measure is quick to raise itself and going to throw money to protect what's around him to great the network we need to protect ourselves from rising sea levels. then, lastly, when arrived to the subject matter areas were looking. honestly the big one is transportation and probably pains go talk more detail about apple were looking about open space job growth and opportunities for small businesses, economic and workforce development sea level rise protection i just talked about affordable housing. committee facilities, were looking with help with the planning department, what is the need for things like
7:20 am
committee facilities, like the police stations grocery stores, to make sure the service levels we will see in this city is the thing that the rest of the circuit sustainability obviously key and eight era of rising sea level and climate change to make sure these developers as cutting-edge as possible using as little water as possible using as much on potable water for nonreportable use as possible. then equity and diversity trying to figure out ways to interact with the southeast community of the city which has obviously seen underinvestment in past decades but we like to get together as part of this new growth again to lift all with bold part of the city has a gross and accommodate the people coming here. now all enough to ms. payne >> take you mr. martin. >> thank you. carly ping mta. as we look at the transportation component of the forthcoming negotiations in this overall approach,
7:21 am
-can you put this slide back up? thanks. we first want to look at what do we already have slated in this area either fully planned and funded work in the works? so, in the near-term but interesting and exciting is there's a lot of long-term eight projects that are very close to being delivered. the transbay terminal. the central subway the associated key third line increasing frequency, the blue-green light improvements at the place facility which will result in overall system improvements and performance and reliability. then, we also have a host of more localized improvements that are really aimed to increase accessibility for my safety and overall system improvements and these are bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure expansion of bike share throughout this area . intersection improvements and other treatment. between the
7:22 am
first slide and the second side curmudgeon show you, not all of those projects are as of mta projects but to give a sense of what our agency's investment already is in this near-term within this southern southern bayfront area commander capital improvement program between now and 2021, the over $1.4 billion invested this air. so, as you know, projects in our cip are projects where there is funding identified. so these are real projects with real plans and delivery program. now, looking up to the midterm, we have additional projects. there that are on the horizon such as caltrain extension, the 16th
7:23 am
st., terry lamb. geneva hardy prt and others that we are hard at work on and it will continue to increase access and mobility in this area. beyond that, there are additional efforts that were putting with regional agencies on to bring even more options, whether it's core capacity improvements were second title for part were other projects. so, as we think about the negotiation wednesday by think of you things are important to point out. each one of these projects that transportation obligations. our goal is to have these projects collaborate with each other and through their obligations and the commitment, so that we are seeing a greater contribution and greater benefit than if we approach these projects on an individual basis. the kinds of obligations i'll be seeing and
7:24 am
the kinds of benefits will be seen are kind of in three categories. first, the localized infrastructure. by that, i really mean things like ensuring that this consistent and contiguous bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure across neighboring sites like pier 70 and an rg and other safety improvements throughout the area. the second is investment in our transit system over all those kinds of things could be purchasing rail vehicles or contributions to our maintenance facilities there really help this area but also help the system overall. the third area is really looking at how these projects fit into those longer-term big moves changes and contributions for improvements in our system like the core capacity project. of course, we will also be asking the projects to really think about how they manage-how they shape trips to dissertation demand management.
7:25 am
as mike said, all of these projects, once they are actual specific proposals, will be coming forward to the sport. so, we've presented today is our early approach to addressing them and looking at them as a whole. so, with that were happy to take questions from for me or my colleague >> thank you. very thoughtful present ticket vendors of the board, questions or comments? >> just a few comments thank you ms. payne and mr. mond good presentation. i am pleased to see all the components especially sort of the economic and workforce and the equality and equity components because i can only imagine how nervous people get when we talked about the development of that area.
7:26 am
what kind of contains what some of our still more affordable neighborhoods in that area. so i am pleased to see that. looking at the map-i can't switch pages very quickly on this one. this much housing going on that area. i see were going to the t-third took greater frequency as you said ramping up as the moment comes along. you did mention the bike and pedestrian improvement should i just want to touch on that again because i think it's so important that we recognize that people can and will walk pretty fair distance to get a one seat ride to their destination. i want to make sure that we really focus on making those walking and biking corridor but only as space is possible but as present as husband there are walks were willing to do because they're lovely in the box are pretty sure dinner trees and pretty things to look at there are what's that are equal distance we just want to because it's a long 8 unpleasant st. or across
7:27 am
a nasty street that doesn't feel safe. i just wonder bring that up and remind us all, even though sort of belfast prt or new bus line were t-third minority on everyone's back door, the contrary to what we are from some are young to me or shuttle users and people are willing to walk a fair distance to get to the efficient transportation that could take them to their destination. other than that i think a great presentation and it was perfectly appropriate right up to the land-use one in front of it. so thank you >> director ramos >> i would love to hear if there's been any movement at all around addressing some of the concerns the speaker earlier mentioned about not wanting to pay for the deaf improvements that might be required to prevent sea level rise or any of that. i'm speaking expressly of the
7:28 am
financial districts were anything to that effect. if we could hear a little bit more about what efforts are underway now for my if any to get that done if we might be helpful at all in helping to facilitate that, the creation of those districts? >> thank you very much for the question. so, right now, in the term sheets for the two port projects, these two districts are definitely going to be [inaudible] because of how much concern has heightened over sea level rise, we see this as something that's a must for all these bayfront of elements. were so, i would say the mello roos special taxes the tax and
7:29 am
command keys because that one is my type in how much we need to come from the general fund for day-to-day service to address the growth as well. but the new money the new taxes, this was something ashley pioneered at treasure island which is super impacted by sea level rise. they were saying were going to have these taxes quoted on upfront actually pay off building outlets keep letting him and by the cost of living here. by doing so, i think what we been able to do is really expand the conversation along undetected right now, if we did nothing know sea level rise the sea level the big level is rising over some uncontaminated legend now you've got lands are being cleaned up. bands elevated for the safety of people that live there and hopefully money being thrown off to devise adaptation strategies for areas that are not currently funded. the port is going through i believe $8 million of planning money over the next two years to address the seawall in the embarcadero. for both seismic and sea level rise adaptation strategies and i think the dollars that the port gets personal from its own development as was hopefully eventually from the infrastructure financing district to be a down payment on what is going to be a thing to-$5 billion project. suddenly
7:30 am
not anything that sort of us of the problem in april, but it's one of those things that think were not cobbled together sources like this to address the magnitude of the problem of the city surrounded on three sides by water. >> can i ask is so much fun in the might get generated from any those mechanisms might any of that funding bill towards some of the transportation infrastructure that's talked about as well in addition to the climate change mitigation? >> yes. i think we very much want to do that. i think of three buckets mentioned, we would love to see those tools in the near-term first finance what's needed now in terms of those better connections to the local networks to the extent they can $12 to help with the extension if that's possible. i'm not really sure that works
7:31 am
with the taxes, but may work with other funds, not of these developments. i think what we are doing now is try to sort of cats a wide night over what useful and try to match up the sources with things that can pay for each one and come up with a more knitted together picture based on the slide that ms. payne showed late in the presentation >> i would hope that as those conversations mature in progress that this board in this agency would remain supportive in whatever way possible. i can't stress enough how important i feel all that work is now critical it is the start thinking out and have this in place of that even people coming into the area to not yet quite familiar with it have some certainty as to what to expect as would be the cost of operation and development in this ad. so i plot your efforts and deeply grateful for all of your hard work and looking forward to being a supportive as possible that we can be. >> thank you. director 10 >> i have a question along the same lines. i've just been wondering you're working without portthe ayes have it.
7:32 am
let's make these accessible. but i mean that's a key connection special in the warrior state of this and they'll be greatly zero connection for a lot of folks to come in on. some wondering if a conversation with our along those lines as well as with the port and other regional transportation providers from the waterside because i know there used to and [inaudible] and back to see the 16 street but mentioned that i'd also be interested in seeing other places where we can support in terms of water taxi service making sure that service is accessible. things like that i wondered with those conversations are sounding like? >> you cast a wide net in a question and i think it's great because we realize that
7:33 am
although muni does an mta does a huge amount of moving people around the slot other potential resources we can grab. coltrane and 22nd st. station something talk a lot about special in the neighborhood is best with peers 70 going and how those interact. i think out of electrification in general coffee moosewood because the increase in frequency there can provide another north-south spine in this area. then water transport, i mean it something that's on the tip of everyone's tongue because in so doable but i think this can help grow that critical mass for something like a scheduled water taxi service that takes you around the waterfront because right now it sort of a demand a system that doesn't quite have the confidence level i can say, well, if everything is gridlocked on when i can go by water. i received the transbay connection with the 16th st. ferry terminal is something that would be very intriguing and is moving forward although
7:34 am
those are challenging to get done. i think one of the things that mission rockets talked about the giants actually operate a very ferry landing for the ballpark. could we make that a more year-round thing not just for special bands. the development there to help another pressure release these are definitely conversations bid you appreciate the leadership of your agency get into those conversations. but were always the gun on one of come back with that is part of the picture were drawn. >> director borden >> thank you for the presentation made there's a real lack of improvement in the waterfront in terms of actual infrastructure. we have the t-line and we have a few things going on, but we still are really lacking in true infrastructure given the amount of housing and density with peers 70 and the shipyard and whole area. i look forward to further conversations about additional things we can be doing with area because the look at the map it really is lacking when you get to the southern bright bayfront. so i
7:35 am
mean i look forward to working on that and figure out some the solutions are so we can already see come i think the challenges there will be if we don't address that. >> thank you. members of the public >> no member of the public return and speaker card on this matter but it looks like there is some interest rolling forward. >> after this will take a short break. >> just just a few little comments. voluntary tax. let's paid dollars for a tax. i think it's going to slide to quickly. 30 years after the transportation bonds are paid for we can use that money for the seewald. bart is four years old and they are in meeting the more money. i don't see the transportation bond after they
7:36 am
expire. we will need new transportation bonds. there's always been a be in expense. the central underground, amen. let's keep our fingers crossed. the dollars from homes, dollars for developers, dollars for four for housing, is the tail wagging the dog was that dog wagging the tail by developers saying the big dollars, the big profits that they can grab it right now they're in a hurry to grab it because we don't want another recession because that takes everything. downtown, we have got five muni lines. we have express buses galore. that's the downtown area. how is that going to compare to what work you put out in this new wetlands ? basically, that's what a lot of it is. the two-$5 billion
7:37 am
bill just for the embarcadero seewald is expensive but that's a small little section. the cost of defending these developments from the sea rise, it was in this room, 9.5 foot search. that's what we need to protect. that's probably conservative the way things are going. you guys in planning this should be interesting >> thank you. the board will take a short recess at this >> ladies and gentlemen were back in session now >> item 13, >>[reading code] >> good afternoon board members staff and members of the public. my name is--project manager with capital programs
7:38 am
construction at mta. i'm here before you today provide with an update on the geary bus rapid transit project. before coming back to for full board action. before we start, i want to make a point that in the venice corridor project this prt project developed into more of a corridor project than just transit improvement project. we will get into details in later slides. geary bus gary geary boulevard is one heavily used transit corridor in san francisco. it's over 50,000 people date the judy's too many neighborhoods and dozens of other attractions and institutions. that adversity
7:39 am
the people and places along the corridor require more than just pete period and express bus service with over 60%, again but me reiterate 6% of riders boarding during off-peak riders geary needs a 24-hour seven-day week prt solution illuminates transit conflicts, traffic on key segments and makes the street safer everyone. data shows that pedestrian was a time more likely to get into a vehicle versus pedestrian conflict on geary compared to others some comparable city states. as you may know bus traffic transit is globally recognized and cost-effective solution to address increasing transportation demand and i collision rate long san francisco busiest bus corridor. the city decide to pursue prt back in 2003 as part of the proper or k extended japan
7:40 am
because of its low cost and comparison to rail. high-impact, and fast-track implementation. roughly, prt is a third of the price tag of rail. the proposed speed geary budget would benefit not only transit riders but people walking, driving and the community at large transit features like bus only lanes were expected to improve transit reliability by over 20% and offer a 10-to the mid-time savings for both the rapid and local in each direction. traffic conditions would improve to driver habits and riding the bus because we much more efficient and more reliable and other features like traffic signals being synchronized and protected go as high injury corridor geary also getting the full fleet of pedestrian safety implements to
7:41 am
reduce the number of collisions and traffic along segments with her is frequent speeding. all transit traffic and safety features would be corrugated with infrastructure upgrade repairs to roadways and utilities to minimize future construction impacts and reduce costs. environmental document is that potential impacts and first on the list is no build which served as the baseline to measure the potential benefits or impacts of the project under four different prt scenarios. the no build alternative includes improvements in movement as part of the munich and for program such as the red transit lane in the downtown area and also the tensile signal priority short for tsp
7:42 am
along the corridor. alternative two, which the side prt west lesson cost because it does not require reconfiguring the street however, to accommodate more buses and stops parking would be eliminated or removed and be more opportunities for the bus to get delayed in traffic because of right turn conflict" vehicles violating the rules. alternative three offers the most transit benefit to protect the center running busway. completely eliminating traffic conflicts. however, it would require reconfiguring the fillmore tunnels and underpasses to it, they'd station and bus only lanes and also eliminate the majority of left turns along the corridor. it would allow passing lanes to allow continuous local and rapid service but again a significant amount of off street parking would be removed those old one of the main concern we've heard over and over from community members is try to preserve parking is much as possible. moving on from alternative three-c is the same
7:43 am
old tired of the rate without the passing lanes. and consolidated rapid and local service between golf and 27 street. consolidated service prisons more parking [inaudible] in the manager number of stops in closer space [inaudible] that brings us to the last alternative, which is the sra short for staff recommend altered hybrid option. which is the best of alternatives two and three and this would staff recommends. was chosen because it address community needs and concerns and reduce cost by preserving masonic and fillmore underpasses for the tunnels and allows operating prt and five running lanes east. one of the main concerns with the design of the project was parking availability as i mentioned early. consolidated service option center running bart enrichment preserves parking and maximizes transit benefits on the commercial corridor condenses segment of gary boulevard. i usually move [inaudible] there you go. these
7:44 am
two images represent how prt would look along the center and the side burning segments of the corridor. as you can see, the top rendering shows side running at geary and fillmore. then you have the beautiful side running portion at gary and 17th with a dual median and this area will talk about a little bit later but were actually increasing 13% of green infrastructure. increasing it by 13%. again, new platforms for safety enhancements, tvs. a lot of improvements. leading up to the entire mental document the team solicited comments and encourage people to give feedback on the project. over
7:45 am
200 people attended the public comments meeting is a mary's cathedral in over 300 comments wer since the releae we posted over 50 means and again over 50 meetings since november of 2015 . we have done extensive engagement of the public and the numbers show it. but 50 min. with stakeholder groups around the question that even meetings were held to address specific concerns project proposals. in three of the specific cases, we developed working groups to try and identify new design solutions addressing common pics concern. several changes were made to the projects for the better result of the working poop meetings. in addition, the right photo or, it has a picture of a virtual reality kiosk, which aims to paint a better picture of what prt would look like at webster street and 17th st. this machine residents, merchants,
7:46 am
interested parties could go and look at it and streamed down that segment of the roadway they could easily see what type of improvements slated to come down that area with implementation of the geary prt. over 6000 read the kiosk the overwhelming majority of individuals for the project. we had a mild survey and majority of the feedback was in favor of the project. ongoing outreach as we approach for action includes engagement techniques that aim to include a broader audience which is being used for van ness improvement project and mailers, and just to make sure that we get to everyone will actually incrementing the door-to-door ambassador throughout the corridor measure no one is left out. throughout the outreach process, the summarizes of the general feedback budgeting hazard. to address these
7:47 am
concerns over changes made including consolidated service enrichment of local stopping at spurs. successful in retaining the bridge. additional safety woman's and carefully placed bus stops near schools and senior centers. this photo or map represents geary prt proposals that existing transit only lanes between poland and golf street. the bus would operate on the side of the street between downtown or market street got to palm avenue. in the ctr., street that [inaudible] and 20 fifth avenue. as you can see, the transition points are circled in both of these locations there will be a queue jump which allow the bus safely pass through the intersection ahead of other vehicles given at start like a safe start. so going in and out of the center run to side running to be fully sick because though get the first
7:48 am
opportunity were good priority. several local stops would be eliminated in the richmond to allow the bus to operate in the middle of the street without passing lanes. the bus would stop at all of the same stops along the segments. careful consideration senior centers and health institutions determine the proper location of the bart stops along the consolidated service area. to existing rapid stops when i existed mentioned at spurs and the other laguna on local only stops it is there low ridership, location and new transit point to other bus routes. i say that is being proposed because the community has requested we further evaluate laguna and we are in the process to look at the capital and service impacts to see that even a feasible request. again, this is in an effort to continue engagement in refining the project as we go forward. the total time
7:49 am
savings round-trip for the project is 30 min. that's 30 additional minutes of transit rider to spend with their loved one's family friends they might even say a work and work 30 min. late. in addition, debbie significant less budging and gaps in service. but 20% making it easier to get to the destination on time and by bus. just last friday, we conducted a tour for supervisor ease office and brother tour was consistently windows budging. we noticed overcrowded buses actually we got on the buses to show other humans withstanding capacity and we were right next to each other with no wiggle room were moving. so it was a great opportunity for supervisor
7:50 am
he stop this [inaudible] throughout the day as needed so bad. while in addition traffic condition with the drivers chose to take transit and to improve transit i'm sorry- signalized traffic lights. the city influence in almost every intersection collision rates would drop and pedestrian exterior is what improve. the geary corridor become more pleasant for people walking with pedestrian scale lighting and as i mentioned earlier, 13% increased green infrastructure. other foods like repaving and new utilities the package and with a project minimizing future construction impacts. just the initial sewer survey indicates that we have sewer network pipes that almost 1 139 years old along that segment. as you guys can tell, it's time to replace them. hopefully with this project once it gets approved will definitely part of it. to achieve division for
7:51 am
prt and safer streets rise in some cases mobile parking gate of the project team is than a great job because of keeping our numbers high and hearing the public as far as parking and their concerns of loss of parking. overall, 97% apartheid would be retained. the majority of the parking loss occurring would actually occur along segments with off street options on street parking options. to maintain the bus only lane through the tunnel areas are questionable of steiner bridge. this location has surface crossing to be enhanced as part of the project and we have data to show that 80% of the current pedestrians at that intersection are a cross the service level crossing. just like we were successful at what a lot of time and a high-level effort by staff, to
7:52 am
a valuate webster bridge to see whether we can retain and design around a commode with the same process into steiner bridge. unfortunately, given where the structure of peers are for the bridge for the outbound direction was no way we could actually design and not take will say from hamilton recreational park facility and that's on a desired path forward. the geary project has adopted a phased approach to deliver city permits assumes possible prior to the center running portion in the richmond district. the basic session about jesse minogue allows design implementation of the two phases to have it concurrently supporting a timely delivery in getting improvements to the public as soon as possible. based to detail would design will be ongoing for the implementation of phase 1 and would occur actually in three sub phases. the first of phase that
7:53 am
includes doctors the striping the street with bus only lanes between market and defending division ii lane narrowing between golf and cross to get the second sub phase will include signal phrase upgrades and followed by the last and third phase which includes several improvements to the sewer, water, roadway infrastructures was transit and pedestrian. [inaudible] yet to be determined as we talked about these two would require more extensive construction and utility replacement is requires reconfiguring the roadway to accommodate to landscape center medians and getting the center running us aligned. at first glance the cost of the project may seem a bit high. but we have to remind ourselves these are quarter wide improvements that will last decades. not only make by service more efficient at making utilities people use everyday more liable in the street safer for everyone and not just transit improvements. the final environmental document is already in review and we are on schedule to release the documents to the public in september with a response to
7:54 am
comments. all the release of the final document sfmta board is scheduled to take action on early october and the sfmta board soon thereafter get the design for phase 1 is ongoing and the project team is finally legislating phase 1 improvements the same day as bringing the document in front of you. for approval. we hope to move this important transit and safety project forward as quickly as possible pending project review. with that i think of your time and patience. be happy to take any questions you might have. >> thank you very much. we are members of the public who wish to speak to this yes. we do >> first world to that >> >>[calling names]will do
7:55 am
that >> gene identifies the premises sure thank you for your consideration my previous requested is greatly appreciated.i can tell you make things are wrong with this but at the remainder 1 min. and 50 seconds. to facilitate that i did submit to ms. boomer a copy of the letter i wrote to the sf cta who is the principal in the draft eir. some of the comments that i don't have time to make are included in that document. let me say, first of all men enthusiastic muni rider and i support improving transit. i've also been following this project for years. for some reason my first impulses wait a minute give what impact is the gap on geary and neighborhood i live which is near 25th and geary. got a better chance to look at it for many years, very concerned about that. you just
7:56 am
heard what the trade-offs are for this. then i think you were given the whole story. if you look at the cost and benefits, i hope you get a slightly different impression based on what i am saying. downside are it's going to cost over $200 million and by the way, i'm focusing almost exclusively on the center lane segment. which is between 27th ave. and home which is a block after. that portion of the project alone will cost somewhere between 150-2 and her million dollars. it's going to have a significant impact during the construction and small businesses in the neighborhood. that hasn't been an economic impact study on that would support in order to determine the extent of that. the amount of time it's going to be saved in return for this increasing money impact on the businesses, removal of 200 trees and diversion of traffic to acquire decisive as well as impact on the geary boulevard itself, in that particular strip will be at best, 2 min. in a might even be 15 seconds >> thank you. next speaker,
7:57 am
please. >> >>[calling names] >> thank. bob szell. a member of the planning association for the richmond. the planning association for the regiment has taken the position with the sector the gary geary prt that when easily done first is divided do all those things except have a red lane that is 24-hour bus lane on a street that doesn't need that. more than that, when they put in a red lane going to ways that going to strip out the center. the center is populated by mature trees. those trees were put in place by mayor christopher, back in 1959 as a major speed for station after. with a doing is they provide a
7:58 am
quality of life for people living the richmond get its enormous. it's very very important to them. now we been told that they can plant new trees. that's fine but saplings so just come up immediately into a mature tree. there isn't impacted by resources there that serious. there's an impact upon the quality of life. and we believe there'll be an impact on the businesses that are there. there's a lot of small businesses that employ a lot of people but they are not necessarily robust. the gary is a corridor that is a shot corridor. the restaurant corridor is an auto corridor but if you take away the time that could be taken away when they're putting the construction of we think this can be real damage. now, there are a lot of things that have been said that are not exactly accurate. we dealt with cta and mta representatives for a
7:59 am
matter of 20 hours and you, sitting here, i think need to have those 20 hours per week that you give them to you. we would like to tell you what went on in those 20 hours will we actually did. >> let me interrupt you can you summarize that fairly briefly spewing the commission got a little time to answer that question.. yes, thank. >> yes, thank you can i go november 5 it was a first public hearing about the plan. it was at the st. mary's cathedral and it was a public comment meeting. but nobody was allowed to make any public comment. the but he was allowed to ask a question. that unfortunately, has been away this is been handled by pr. these statements, which you see in the slides that were just before you are often
8:00 am
inaccurate. they are just not accurate. for instance, when we asked to find out how many people were actually commuters, all we could find out was how many people got on in certain places but of course there is in a system now and probably should not be a system for they get off so we don't know how many people have the long run. we've done our own surveys and we're all writers of muni and we see no reason for the statement that says buses are slow and reliable. they are not on speaking. the gary geary 38 ought. the geary 38 bay x are very fast. people are very very pleased by what they see. there's no reason for mta to be denigrating its own service. so, there are many many more things to talk about about that and what i want to propose was that we have a meeting at which
8:01 am
we have an opportunity to set forth what we think is important before you are forced into position we have two approve this. i mean you don't have the time. you have the time to investigate even though you're the duty of care to worry about this you don't have the time. we put the time into and within seven opportunity to come up for you with that >> thank you. suggestions the board will consider. so the meeting with the richmond association. thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> i represent the holy virgin cathedral, which is on 26th ave. between 76 and 27th ave. on geary. our membership is about 1200 people. we have senior housing facilities at their. we have two schools there. we believe this disposal
8:02 am
is very dangerous to the seniors and to the students, and we very much are opposed to the proposal. it's been said by the project manager that we've met and they heard our concerns and came back with incorporated our concerns into what the proposal is now. i can say that is not true. nothing that we said, expressing our concerns, was incorporated into the proposal as it sits now. i think this is a dangerous costly unnecessary and i do believe that the board nor the staff realize the intensity of opposition to this project. on the merchants, from the residence, the mother people visiting the area to this plan. i sincerely hope that if you
8:03 am
talk about $200 million i think is much better ways to use it them to create something that will be a real detriment to the living conditions out there. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. i'm a parishioner holy-which is located between 26-27th ave. as previously mentioned we have a lot of concerns but this project going forward. the school of course as mentioned there's two schools operating out of that church and right now the parking they have no parking at the carbon services like a buffer to protect the kids in case they run out, if the bustling is put against the curb that buffer is gone. so that opens a lot of possible incidents with a kick and run out on the street and get hit by a bus. the second concern is
8:04 am
loss of parking. that area, especially on weekends it's almost as right difficult to find parking. one time i circled literally for 40 min. before i found a parking spot was probably was about seven blocks away. with all this loss of parking stock to get better it's going to get worse. we asked mta to look for options that the locate additional parking in a believe they look into that but at this point, we have no valid reasonable solution to provide additional parking that's needed. a lot of our parishioners come from other locations. east bay, south bay and so on. taking public transportation in a lot of cases is not an option so they're forced to drive. with this situation a parking were going to lose a lot of parishioners which we already have due to other reasons but
8:05 am
with this implementation this project were going to lose a lot more. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> eileen-zero in solitaire with the geary residence and merchant. public comment residents and merchants concerns were characterized as cold-unquote complaints. we this characterization is condescending dismissive and patronizing. i'm hoping the board does not share this perspective for the propose caravelle project mta has stated they did not do an economic impact study. the mta could also not do a cost-benefit analysis. this is also true of the proposed geary prt price. the following is an exit from the gary residence and merchant statement and i will quote: this prt project
8:06 am
seems to just justification other than transit improvement. indeed, the budget shows it would take pay for major infrastructure improvements. it's not clear how many of those investments will be of the tubes by the city where developers make use of them. it is obvious the developers will begetting a freebie here under the guise of infrastructure improvements are required when did you the street for the prt. what assures assurances do we have the cost incurred would be anything less than a subsidy for those who will come along and build more units along and near the corridor? is this the hidden subsidies. they should be discussed openly but it's not been raised by muni itself. there's been a strong policy framework density in the richmond. people are suspicious given serving a little time for these small minority of writers will commute to downtown does not justify spending $300 million or more. they're curious about the fact that down to money seems to be behind this project." >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names]
8:07 am
>> good afternoon commissioners. mary eliza. this board has not been a very good job of listening to the public if we believe the were saying here today and heard otherwise. you're not responding to the needs of the public. when not sure what you're responding to but it's not the needs of the drivers, the riders, would the general public. neighborhood groups and merchants are meeting tonight in two separate meetings to discuss alternative to this geary project. in case you did not know. merchants from castro to polk street and mission are losing business many are closing due to bad traffic and parking problems and the caravelle and geary merchants do not want to become part of
8:08 am
that group. of lost business. the merchants will not support a sales tax increase that will further reduce their profits and i'm really not sure the citizens of the city are ready to support that either. we just kind of wondering which of your many projects you're willing to give up if you have to. you don't get that sales tax increase. thank you >> thank you. and you must to address the board seeing none, at the pleasure of the board? >> there are people. >> you want to stand up and speak? >> good afternoon jim and is david hurston, long-time richmond resident living in san
8:09 am
francisco since 1960. controversy is no stranger to projects in san francisco. but as a long-term residence am very alarmed that the amount of controversy, the mta projects are generating. when i get to a public meeting in people are screaming at each other and yelling at each other, beyond the scope of the project, this tells me that people are not being heard. if i had to characterize this project, it would be a steamroller that's copying her. not being heard by the residence and they are really the feeling for my perception is, it's all about the sales job. the virtual reality kiosk is a good example that. he was stated in their presentation that we have spent hours with them. i'm part of the geary merchants group. basically, in those hours they
8:10 am
put their powerpoint presentation. we prepared our points and there was never any dialogue. i think that's what's missing on this project is a positive dialogue and scope of the project forward but not and in a lawsuit, not end up in a ballot initiative, not end up with people screaming kid i think it's possible to move the city forward without hurting small businesses. without hurting the 20% of the people in the richmond district that are senior citizens and over 65. so you do the math over 70,000 people how many that is good i just think there's another way is not necessary to rush this project as an emergency. this guy is fun. i urge everyone to take a closer look, sit down, work honestly and hear what the people have to say in a honest fashion and also [inaudible] because other people of submitted points and it's like talking to a black hole. so when somebody request something say yes or so note >> thank you. next speaker, please.
8:11 am
>> we been trying we've been asking the mta and cta for years and i have to certificate to prove it more than 10 years economic impact study it lets do a study. we been rebuffed by the mta and the cta. when i testified in front of them and i mentioned parking, i was given the answer of if i'm really so concerned about parking maybe i should consider
8:12 am
moving to a shopping mall there's plenty of parking over there. i think that you really have to locate into this matter. we have light rail on geary boulevard from micah 30-50 and by taking it down we have more certificates from every branch of government giving us the foresight to remove it and to create a boulevard, a commercial corridor, and now you want to take that away and kill it. not telling you the truth. they cannot tell you with the prt there was a gas line over there. that's not in the plan but there is a gas line there. if they say they don't want you to know it scored to take 5-6 months per block the
8:13 am
construction of the prt. but where talking about the block is not just one block because you got that right block and a half and a block can have. how can we go to survive? people on a mission or going out of business. people on federal are trying to ongoing business. we cannot let you do that to us. and we ask you to be compassionate and be sensitive to it you can. we are not against improving transportation on geary boulevard but don't put us out of business. thank you so much for your consideration >> thank you. anyone else care to address the board? >> i have a lot of compassion for this argument because the special because of the money being spent for this project. on van ness i don't know how much i one is costing but that one could simply been solved by having a shuttle bus running between aquatic park and the mission and were frequently to take up the problem being that
8:14 am
there was not enough frequency of buses. without spending the millions of dollars that we spent in the disruption involved. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> sylvia johnson. i say i know that exactly the problem is is that [inaudible] needs to be on it is a kind of old way of doing work a lot better and the efficiency that's been going on i have [inaudible] causing the rails. i'm telling you this is not [inaudible] putting people out of business and talking about other things that [inaudible]. i mean, it's
8:15 am
really [inaudible] that's not going to work [inaudible] we have problems in the [inaudible] and take care of [inaudible]. our main problem [inaudible] i am tired of this, you know, [inaudible] because some politics is better [inaudible] and trying to run [inaudible] this is where the issue is in the police department. i'm going to make sure housing and equipment [inaudible] because a
8:16 am
lot of [inaudible] it will be [inaudible] >> thank you. next speaker, please. just, come on up. >> hello. if i understood correctly, i was very heartened to hear you said you would meet were overhearing with the richmond people? did i understand that correctly? >> bestows what you want, >> the people are terrible the merchants and resident roots that similar problems with sfmta. that had meetings with us but it is not been well advertised in the community. when we finally managed the
8:17 am
leaflet the community ourselves to tell them what actually was happened because as of the third and final meeting, where the staff was announcing what changes they have made based on community input there were hundreds of people who didn't have any idea the stops were being removed. according hours were being booked because the sunset when upset come to an open house on the old sourdough. the make the capital more efficient and safer >> this about geary prt >> we have something similar but i want to know the next time we come to officially be presenting their proposal to you for final approval. or hopefully you would adopt a terrible plan that would just do it as a trial permitted i was wondering if you'd also be willing to meet with the caravelle merchants group and residents groups before you get to that point so we can avoid the problem that happen elsewhere where it's implemented
8:18 am
in most people still don't know what about it because it's such anger and dissension in the community. >> thanks. next speaker, please. anyone else was to speak to the board? seeing none, members of the board >> i know mr. chairman from our agenda this is a presentation on. we have no action on this item. i've no follow-up questions but i would think mr.-for the presentation and for keeping this board up to date on the progress. i'm gary prt >> anybody else on the board? director ramos >> i just want to state up into a part of this process. actually this is in my second term as a board member here the reason why i was actually appointed to the sports because i was serving on the citizen advisory committee for thegeary prt and i was five years ago and we were hoping that would project would've vastly been implemented by now. so there's no rush here. this is long past due i think. there are 50,000
8:19 am
riders on that line every day that i feel, by not doing anything are ignoring the fact that that line were having a hard time getting anybody upon the line anymore. i mean those buses are so crowded now that if you're a person with the ability issues or have any kind of it-if you can play twister, and having a hard time getting on a bus and i know because i ride it. i so know that is an auto oriented corridor. a lot of business were set up their to be auto oriented. as such, we should be as sensitive as possible to doing whatever we can to protect and preserve the small businesses that are doing business there and we cherish. so, i'm hoping that going forward that we are not necessarily we that we as a city, we as a part of the
8:20 am
minutes of howdy are working with the economic development agency to make sure putting in place whatever measures we need to make sure the small businesses are taken care of in a way that would help transition to what really should be started off as, in transit corridor. i won't say more because is a long meeting but looking forward to having these conversations going forward but i certainly am very concerned about making sure the businesses stay afloat both in preparation for the construction during construction, and after construction. in the same way women able to do with essential subway i think we've done phenomenal job working with the businesses and making sure that they stay afloat in that capacity. so i look forward to the conversation. >>the whole goal is to make it
8:21 am
easier for people to access your business, not to make it more difficult. so, i know this project has been under i was the vice chair of the bank may for prop k and 23 in geary prt was in that consideration back then. we been having this conversation for very long time. i think what's hard for us is that it doesn't seem like we have been able to come together the community and mta, to adequately feel comfortable with the project did i know that was a mention of 20 hours, 20 meetings were 20 hours of meetings that might be helpful if there were a list of the top five things were the 10 things
8:22 am
that were the pain points of the community that we could address because i think it's going to be the easiest way for us to tackle those things. we have a very clear list of suggestions that these of things would make it better. i've always believe is important to be proactive and resolutions rather than point out the problems which we all can easily do on a number of things but i think we have a lot of great minds and community leaders in the community across from us as well's people at mta working hard on figuring out how do we also talked about earlier plan for our future. our population is growing and even growing in the richmond district as well. i think i saw housing prices are gone up in the richmond district because of greater demand. no people living out. we know the system is stressed and we do we can't transport many more people on that system today. so we have to come up with a solution. so, i look forward to working with all of you. i know we've been all been
8:23 am
working together and i'll begin figure out how we can better communicate with each other and hear each other so that everybody feels like we are doing what's in the best interest of the city and in the community overall. >> director borden i think that's extremely well stated argument the positive positive suggestion the top 4-5 things that are problems as opposed to having 24 hours of meetings. similar group c or c those before we put four. i definitely support that again this is not an action item. i want to thank our staff for the presentation all the public for being a. let's move to the next item >>item 14 >>[reading code]. >> how many?
8:24 am
>> maybe we can ask the public to give recommendations. when we call on members of the public who want to speak on the shuttle bus issue and in the board will talk about it. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon mr. thomason >> hi my name is david thomas. almond with in building manager at 7001 bush st. me on behalf of our tenants especially tenants who now have the doing windows that face the new shuttle stop those put in a couple of weeks ago. i missed into something of a pilot which is why we are here. i just-i would like to point out that when these buses pull in as a diesel engine in the back of
8:25 am
them. those mega-doesn't that diesel engine sits about 15 feet for the bedrooms of some of the tenants in our building and they're being very negatively impacted could i like you all to consider what it would like to 150 people, 200 people directly outside your bedroom window and have idling diesel engines 15 feet from your bed. this is what our tenants are going to especially on the first and second floor where those buses-with this new shuttle stop has been put in. i know are small number of tenants and i can hear from a lot of people benefit from this program. i'm not inky-shuttle in any way but this new stop is literally forcing our tenants out of their beds start at 5:40 am every morning. so i ask you to reconsider we are in the neighborhood you would like to put these shuttles. the places that are not that close to where people sleep so thank you for your time. >> next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names]
8:26 am
>> good afternoon. >> hello members of the board. i want to speak first of all, i want to support the shuttle okay shannon at bush. as either standard, you can correct me if i'm wrong, this is a temporary stop to replace one that used to be at then asked neither california were segments oh while the banas bus rapid transit is been constructed. i'm not too familiar with that neighborhood and that's on my stockholder am glad the board is working to identify your placement stop while the brd is under construction and accommodate those who get on in that area. i think some of us have had complaints over how stop changes have been made in the past where stocks were moved without there being a proper replacement provided good i'm glad that's not happening in the case of cost and bush but one place where
8:27 am
that is still the cases near the former stop at 18th and church three. we don't have an option for those buses living in the neighborhood. i live at 20th and guerrero. there's no stop within a half-mile. it's almost 3/4 of a mile to the nearest one at 26 to 25th and valencia. in the evening drop-off. so, speaking to item 14-c grade asap at cesar chavez and bartlett, i think this is i think it's reasonable to create a stopped there and i think that it would be reasonable to relocate the 25th and valencia stop there if that stopped like everybody go to the stock were well served by that stop. however that's currently serving overflow traffic from
8:28 am
people who would prefer a stop your 19 and dolores. so, i would ask you not to move the 25th and valencia stop until an alternative internet even divorce can be established. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon >> grew sparsely. i lifted the corner bush and cost. 1701 bush for 21 years. i am in favor of the shuttle buses. i'm not thrilled about the buses idling 15 feet i measured it from our windows. for my bedroom window. the diesel tossed is not a lot of fun. they start at 5:40 am which is a little earlier than i used to wake up. we've always slept with the windows open because it's great weather in san francisco. we don't do that anymore. the biggest were some of the safety problems are that there is a street trees next to the parking where identified for the buses. but they don't pull in there because they
8:29 am
can't. the trees are not tall enough to go over the top of the buses. and they're not able to-they're not able to park in a parking zone which actually takes out a lane of driving rain, two. on golf. also, it has a problem with people turning from bush onto golf because they're actually out in the driving lane. [inaudible] i think a solution like would suggest it be to move it to go off and geary. next of the catholic church, there, there are no apartments or buildings next. there's actually a lot of room. there's not that many people dr. overnight either. there's no cheese in the way. it's also no further from the van ness than your geary and
8:30 am
bush is. there's no [inaudible] i think i would be a good alternative >> thank you, sir. next speaker >> >>[calling names] >> are any of those folks are? >> hello again >> hello, again. thanks for the opportunity to speak about the good i'm another person that currently rides the shuttle from the 25th and valencia stop. my understanding is the cesar chavez location will potentially be a replacement for that stop. so i really appreciate again that there is replacement and not just removal. as a huge impact
8:31 am
on my quality of life being able to take the shuttle from our location. i have seen i want to echo what scott said. i've seen a larger influx of riders since the stop was a limited your church and 18. so, it's going to add to blocks to my commute. i'm okay with that. i think have stronger affect on people who already becoming further because there stop was moved. so, i just applied you sort of making a replacement and ask that it be consideration for adding a stop closer to the dolores park neighborhood. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] last person who's turning a speaker card. >> hi. my name is mark hurwitz. i live again on farrow street 23. the stop that valencia 25th is one i use. i think that moving itself to make the school saver is good but actually having more stops will actually improve the pocket when the big problems is about congestion but i think overall the reduction of number of sauces increase congestion at various places around the city. see more stops would
8:32 am
give the people the opportunity the fewer shuttles acting individual stocks and reduce congestion people say around that sort of thing. so assuming charge the urgency of replacing the other stops in front instead of delete one at one. it's only not reducing the number is very good. josie on our topless communication. there was agenda for this meeting said it indicated we would be removing the stop but in fact, there was no communication posted around the location and the agenda for the meetings for this previously discussed adding the stop at cesar chavez and bartlett did not discuss any possibility of removing the stop at valencia and 2050 or so i think that's something that perhaps we can do better communication with people who are the writers and affected by this
8:33 am
>> members of the board spewing >> i do feel the matter where we put a stop or move the stop on were running into problems. i don't pretend to be an expert in any of these locations but maybe the way forward to today always is to approve these people should be willing to walk a little bit further for once you ride to the destination, but i think there's a limit about people are willing to work. the one with the bus idling outside of people's bedrooms, i absolutely feel you on that. there's nothing worse that diesel smell right outside your house so maybe on about one it looks
8:34 am
like here's a big we are located at good releases in a fantastic step out to look for an option that won't be outside which may not exist. >>
8:35 am
8:36 am
provide just a quick overview of the key points you need to snow. this is largely the material you have been seeing all the along and the good work of moe neek and her staff have... . >> terrific. thank you. >> thank you. i want to ask quickly roberta presentation on the -- [pause]. unless you brought it? did you bring it? so sorry about that. okay. so we'll just do a quick summary of the points that we're going to make today. so good afternoon i'm moe neek webster with sfmta* finance division. and what
8:37 am
we're bringing before you for adoption today is the... capital improvement program. the program is a rolling 5-year road map... to advance the strategic goals of our agency all while keeping -- all while being focused, efficient, and effective with the money and resources we have to us. some of this information will be available to you... capital budget but what's different today is we're presenting the overall comprehensive 5-year program, which we bring to you for approval every two years. in your materials for today is a 200-page document that describes in detail over 250 projects and all their funding sources. and there are many many people who are involved in the development of this program. and it's led by the capital financial planning and analysis team. and i'm going to turn it over quickly to arial as par tiew
8:38 am
santo* who is the leader of that team. thank you. >> good afternoon. >> thank you. and thank you monique. and thank you for your patience as we deal -- it reminds me back in the day when we had the [indecipherable] in the classroom.* so as monique mentioned, you already seen a portion of this presentation as we presented the budget. so i'm going to move through it quickly.... first two years of that are the capital budget that came to you folks in april. and as you remember, what we think as cip is, it's really the implementation tool for all of the strategies and plans that the city has and the region and the mta. so we apply the financial constraints to our capital plan to come up with what set of projects we're going to deliver with the revenue we expect to see over the next five years. some of the main goals that we're pushing for through
8:39 am
this plan are vision zero, transit first and state repair.* we're very focused on safety and we're also looking at investing in areas of concern. so building on that, one of the things that we're very proud of is that we've been able to include recommendations from the muni equity strategy in the... so as you recall our 2-year budget is implementing all the recommended capital project that came out of that strategic effort. so we're really happy to be able to see that reflected in here. we also want to talk a bit about how we've taken into account the potential ballot measures this year. so as you're aware, there was a major effort through the mayor's office transportation 2030... citywide... so several recommendations came out of that, one of which is the gee
8:40 am
owe nn bond passed in dwiewrn.* potential sales tax measure... we're looking at putting on the ballot this year. so we have assumed assumptions related to that ballot measure in our cip. we put 45 to 65 million dollars* per year starting in fiscal year 18 moving forward. does a bit of involving process getting more information about what that measure would actually look like. we've weighed out the details here based on the latest information. so they -- based on where we're seeing the proposed charter amendment now, it looks like there would actually be somebody available... stwent million dollars for transportation and then $100 million for every year after that. those dollars are split within various categories in the sales tax measure ranging
8:41 am
from muni service, investment in suite facilities, infrastructure, investment in regional projects, investment in vision zero and a portion for street resurfacing. all of those various surfaces combined, yo look at our 5-year picture* you've seen a slide like this before, but we're happy to show that our 5-year program right now is 17-21 is in fact large rch the previous 5-year* program from 15 to 19. and on top of that if you were to look at the course [indecipherable] and exclude the central subway major project we're actually increasing our investment by over 20%. for later for your perusal, you can look at this very detailed chart which breaks out our expected funding and expenditures by program level across the five years. so you'll see again those two years capital budget and they add up to 3.4 billion over the five years. and we do want to call
8:42 am
out that for the first time we're going to be actually investing a portion of our fund balance in capital projects, as you approved there's over 75 million dollars in those* first two years being focused on priority projects coming out of our fund balance reserve. the next few slides call out some of the key projects in the different program areas. again, these are fairly similar to the slides you saw with the capital budget. so i'm not going to spend time on them individually. if you have any questions, we're happy to speak in more detail. i think we will move on to the last slide, which shows that this developing the cip has been almost a year long effort for my team. there's a lot involved in terms of vetting it internally and externally. and so, we want to highlight that we did
8:43 am
significant outreach, spoke with many different stakeholder groups, spoke with you several times. additionally, the individual projects that are represented in this program also have their own outreach strategies. and with the hopeful adoption of the cip today, that outreach doesn't end. we're still planning to do some additional poat-adoption outreach and add this is really a living document. you have the beautiful pdf look to look at now, but as of tomorrow it's probably obsolete*. we're always updating it and keeping it so it reflects our most recent budget and is priority. as those change, we'll continue our efforts to keep the community informed. >> thank you. thank you for the presentation. >> thank you. >> thank you. mr. [indecipherable]. >> yes, you have one member of the public. >> let's hear from one member of the public. >> we have turned in the speaker card on
8:44 am
this matter. >> get the screen back? >> it's been a long afternoon for all of us. car man historic*. i'm very pleased to be with you here today. i will just take a short amount of time, because it is approaching the cocktail hour, right? i'm here as a private citizen, a resident, long time interest in transportation. and a lot of experience in planning and financing projects at the federal level, at the regional level, and here locally. more importantly as the former -- one of the former, several executive directors we've had at the transportation authority. what i wanted to talk to you about today is the fort mason extension. you heard at the beginning of today several people testify* about the need for that project and how important it is -- not just to a bunch of people who are streetcar enthusiasts, let me assure you, okay? but to people
8:45 am
who care about mobility and access in the city and about opportunities. and this project is definitely an opportunity. it is, i think, one that meets the policy criteria that are outlined in the staff memo. and i don't know why it is not specifically included in the capital program. because funds have been identified and a public planning process, however different it may have been from the way muni goes about business because of the coordination and collaboration necessary for the national parks service, we are at a point where we need to begin preliminary engineering of this project. and the window for the validity of the eis is a limited window. the funding has been identified, not committed, but identified, and so, i would encourage you to, as you go forward with adoption to look at ways to include this project. time is of the essence. thank you so much for the time -- for your time.
8:46 am
>> members of the board, closure? [indecipherable]? >> sief as part of the cip one of muni fort's goals is service improvements. and again i want to improve... reduction in service and not an improvement. but another goal under the cip is the 5-year layout of implementing the rapid network serving nearly 70% of all riders to promote to provide more frequent and reliable service. we have asked that rapid buses be put on the [indecipherable] corridor so people who are commuting during busy rush hours can use rapid service and without eliminating the bus stop that so many other people need. so that would be a win-win
8:47 am
situation for sour community -- make it, put on some rapid buses and let us keep our bus stops. and i have lived here in san francisco for over 38 years. and i was always proud of the fact san francisco has had a reputation for taking care of its elderly and disabled residents. and part of that is we have bus stops -- at least in my community -- every two blocks. now i understand mta's goals spacing bus stops up to 1500 feet. that just doesn't work for our community. and for a lot of san francisco where we have so many elderly residents. and even though a lot of younger people are moving into the city, we still have a very large aging population and long-term planning, in 30 years a lot of those young people are going to be aging. and i want to tell you briefly about mary. she uses the alter ra* she's 100 years old. it takes her 10 minutes to walk to her stop.
8:48 am
because that stop is there, it gives her the freedom, independence, and dignity to be able to get around san francisco independently. we convinced mta not to take away the stop. but there are people like mary all over the tar raville community* who need their stops. >> thank you. address the board on this one? seeing none, [indecipherable]. >> i will be happy to make a motion to approve. by i want to ask since this is a living document, do we have the ability to add things in such as the fort mason extension. >> yes. so this is a living document. what per charter amendment you approve the capital budget every two years. and within that we have authority up to 5% of the total budget to make changes. so we could add other projects into it without requiring additional approval. >> and what would sort of the process for that be? because i don't want it to be that, you know, we mandate what goes in there and
8:49 am
in this one-time fell thing. i think it would be good to look at that project. because i think including that in our cip would help that project move along. it sounds like there's some pretty good support for that. >> i want to note it is included in the cip. we have almost... prop k sales tax program to that project in the cip right now for preliminary phases. we don't have a funding plan for the full project. and baz the cip is a fiscally constrained... * we can only add things in we have funding identified for. we can fund projects phase by phase and in this case have the preliminary work funded now and continue to look for solution for future phases. >> and i would just add, if i may, that absence of funding beyond what we've have is reasonably able to commit such as the prop k funding, would not at all preclude us from seeking additional funding to advance project which is our intent and
8:50 am
i heard from the board chair his direction as well. for example, the federal whrand access to parks program that one of the earlier speakers mentioned we anticipate notice of funding availability in early 2017 is what we understand. we'll certainly be aggressively pursuing that for this project. so i wouldn't want folks to be kurnd because we just want been able to identify funds for the project it's not guilty something we'll try to advance*. but we just need to find the funding source for this... we'll be pursuing that as soon as that notice comes out. >> thank you. that's excellent then. i have no questions. thank you both for not only the presentation but for sticking it out for the length of the meeting. >> ... i have a question -- did you say this was built on the assumption also the additional sales tax we're seeking in the fall or all just based on the baseline right now?
8:51 am
>> so we have included assumption from the sales tax in the cip -- yes. >> and in the capital budget that we approved. that same slide is what we've shown you. so where -- we are assuming that. >> so what happens? god forbid -- obviously there's things going on before it and separately we have to get this before the public. what is our default or back position if that doesn't come through for some reason? >> well, but primarily we won't be able to advance some projects in those category that is we showed on the slide that we are hoping to advance. so on the order of -- i don't know -- $12 million a year vision zero funding. there's similar amounts for transit state good repair funding. that much less we'd be able to do -- if we don't have another funding source to come in behind it unfortunately.
8:52 am
>> ... what would we de-prioritize if unfortunately didn't work out for us. >> essentially in every category we have prior toization criteria we're using*. we go as far down the list of priorities as we can given the funding we anticipate. so if there's less funding, we would just have to dial back up categories say vision zero or muni state repair or some of the other muni forward implementation that we are anticipating potential sales tax revenue to help augment. >> thank you. >> motion to second. all say aye. thank you very much. >> . >> item 16... amendment 3 contract with al ston... inventory services to extend contract additional two years for additional amount of 41 million... total contract not to exceed $80 million
8:53 am
698,000. mr. chairman there's no members of public who wish to address you on this matter. >> good afternoon. good evening, it's a pleasure to be the first one on the second shift to make the presentation [laughter] >> i will in fact you i could speak for hours on this topic -- and i'm sure you'd appreciate that. but let me make a couple of points that we'll share with you in the highlight. first of all, i wanted to come to celebrate with you for what has been a tremendous success. success in three ways. when you approved on this initiative some three years ago, what the results have been have been improvements in the service -- in the reliability, in the availability of the rail service. when you take the lrvs today, when you ride the rail service, l, m's always have 2-car trains. because we've been able to stabilize the availability. a
8:54 am
key factor has been this major management initiative, which also leads to a second benefit that we've realized from this process. when this was introduced to you three years ago by brain child of our finance and materials management people, what they did was introduce a blended concept or a hybrid concept for management that would allow us to both take control of the way we manage the inventory. that's very important when you think about the range of cars, the type of equipment you've heard a lot today about different types of modes in cars. so no. 1, we've got a strong contract. no. 2, we've bfn able to -- as the charts indicate, we've been able to reduce the stockouts, reduce the value of inventory. we've saved real money. that's the second. so from a business standpoint, it's the second measure of success. the service, the business
8:55 am
practices, and the efficiency. third standpoint we've really drawn a new paradigm for the business model. and by that what we've done is develop an ongoing dialogue with our existing work force and civil service to preserve the jobs, to preserve the system. build on that by introducing best practices from the private sector. using a firm al ston nn with* experienced car builder, experienced car manufacturer who understands our system, understands the industry, has access and contracts to parts. what that's been able to do is allow us to improve our planning, make sure that we're focused on the critical parts -- 50 critical parts. things for brakes, things for doors, things for propulsion system that you've heard us talk about. so with that, what we've seen over the last three years is really
8:56 am
a spectacular success in terms of the performance. and what we ask of you today albeit very briefly -- and again, i'm very happy to expand on this -- is to continue your support, to extend this contract for two years and to put additional money in the contract to allow us to do this. so that is the 30-second summation. i'm happy to take additional questions, or i'm happy to go back and walk you through the 21 slides that i have prepared. >> [laughter] >> thank you for the presentation. thank you very much. members of the public here to speak on mr. haily's presentation? are you speaking on this one?* [indecipherable] anything else, right? >> managed inventory. well, i'm [indecipherable] johnson. and i think this goes to a deeper
8:57 am
subject, you know, because on a lot of issues why things haven't been done is because they've been playing games. i think we should do something about this, because the issue that they did before that was another game. [indecipherable] in here and they set me up for a [indecipherable]. took it out and then some stupid things. and i think this is, you know,, because i had -- when i got out [indecipherable] and i went straight to washington, d.c. and what happened when i was there is that, again members were absent. and when they come after me, they couldn't handle it. they all went crazy. and
8:58 am
they couldn't believe it. they put ne in prison for it. and this is where i'm talking about the supervisor* is real serious [indecipherable]. because this is already happened before on me [indecipherable]. i think this is a big issue. you know, we need to keep this war going [indecipherable]. make no sense now of these issues. because what we're having [indecipherable] new ideas, new success. during process and business. [indecipherable] we need to make room for it and you
8:59 am
know get this issue. >> thank you. anyone else want to address this board on this subject? seeing none, motion? >> motion to [indecipherable]. >> all those in favor say aye. thank you very much. >> whether to conduct a closed session. motion to move to closed session. >> is there a second? >> all those in favor say aye. >> thank you mr. chairman. put the roll into closed session.
9:00 am