conference it -- confirmation. the governor vetoed that bill. at heart there, as i discussed last time, an issue between certain members of the authority between potential conflicts of office issues, where you have two members of the authority, and the governor's veto give some breathing room to ellis' one of those folks. the last high-speed rail bill i want to draw your attention to was sb965. it, too, was vetoed. it seemed innocuous. this would have streamlined

this. there is a theme there. in addition to these bills in the high-speed rail policy area, within the budget act itself which was signed recently, several vetoes added to try to give more direction to the high speed rail authority. so this governor seems pretty comfortable with the way that the high speed rail authority is working right now. we will see about future governors. a couple of other bills. bills of direct interest to san francisco were authored by a delegation members, including assemblywoman loss. that expanded the definition area for transit builders development districts from a quarter mile to a half mile. a bit more flexibility for the infrastructure development required for those districts.

ab2729 from assemblymember ammiano. that was the bill designed to facilitate the use of automatic equipment at octavia four right turns off of market. the governor vetoed that bill. he claims the authority already visit -- exists. the city felt they needed clarification in the bill. i am not sure why that is the basis of the veto. in his view, it was not necessary. last, senate bill 1061 by senator hancock would have added the pedestrian and cross walking project as part of the bridge project. the governor vetoed that bill as well. there are several other bills and i will not go

normal subcommittee process. there were not major issues that confronted the big five or the four caucuses as we got down into the 100th day of the deadlock on the budget. there were a couple of important items that were included in those waning days of the budget discussion. principally amongst those were the governor's request that was included in the budget to fully fund the state's commitment to the presidio parkway and to include language, in addition to the appropriations that comprise the billion dollar appropriation, included language that specifies and clarifies the funding mechanism availability payments and some other mechanism was it an eligible

approach. that sweeps away a lot of the uncertainty that was in the underlying statutory authorization. presidio parkway is now fully funded from the state's perspective and has cleared the policy issues that were confronting some of the prospective bidders. there were a couple of vetoes that the governor did. $240 million augmentation of state outlets for caltrans. the governor of a limited and that citing the fact that proposition 1 b is getting close to its end point in terms of delivering projects. therefore, there was no need to keep staff at a higher level than what the governor thought was necessary. unfortunately, the reality is, even with that small amount, $240 million, there may be some impact on caltrans ability to

deliver projects in a timely manner. they were already under an attrition of order. this will make it more difficult to match personnel with jobs that they need. those are probably the prominent aspects of the state budget that affect the transportation this year. we will see how the new governor treats transportation when they amend the governor's budget in january. thank you. >> colleagues, any questions? i know this is an information item. >> good morning, mr. chairman, executive director. i wanted to let you know, you just heard mark talk about legislation that took place as part of the budget negotiations to clear the last few options on the presidio parkway.

i also wanted to let you know this afternoon you will be receiving a memo detailing a little bit in latest news. the news is quite promising. in addition to having the legal issue is essentially removed from any potential future for the project, the state panel that developed with the proposals on the presidio parkway had concluded its deliberations on friday and selected a top bidder. we have now not just technical proposals but financial proposals. what gives me pleasure is the abatement level identified by the transportation commission as an inevitable condition to move this forward. that has been improved by the

proposal. in other words, we received a winning proposal that is 20% below the limit set. i am delighted to be able to announce that. it is a first for california, led by san francisco on a project that i know has been of tremendous interest to the board. i wanted to make the announcement and thank you all for this support. this will mark a new way to do business. of course, this announcement is very preliminary in the sense that the negotiations now start with a new bidder. i am fairly confident that we will have a commercial close on this by the end of the year, by the end of december. >> thank you. item number eight? >> introduction of new items. this is an inaccurate

information item. >> i do not see any new information. >> this is an information item. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you, everyone for being here. meeting adjourned.

>> good morning. i would buy to call to order the october 14 meeting of the transbay joint powers authority. madam secretary, please call the roll. > [roll call] mr. chairman, you have a quorum. >> next item. >> communications. the november meeting will be held on november 1, due to be regularly scheduled date following -- falling on an

absurd holiday. an official notice will be sent out. >> thank you. next item. >> order directors new and old business. >> any new or old business? seeing none, let's move on to item five. >> executive director's report. >> good morning. i would like to begin by mentioning that we have a new head of the program management program control team for you. emilio cruz. i think you know him from working on the project in various capacities. i wanted to officially welcome him. we continue to be in support of the design and development structures, with all of our stakeholders, including the fire department, dpw, we have also met with the sentences for redevelopment agency, as you will hear later on.

we are also working with greyhound and amtrak as well. we are now 35% complete with the construction documents for the project. excavation packages are due on november 9 to us. as you know, we have extended the bid date because bidders requested more time to prepare for this package. with respect to the bus ramp. we have been working hard on that. i would like to have richard present the design to you right now. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is richard kauffman. i am on the design team.

i want to give you an update on the structural design elements of the bus ramp connecting the transit center. we did have some changes with high-speed rail in the springtime. over the summer, we worked out those alignment which had an to affect on our ability to stretch across natomas street, and that has caused some changes in the design. what you see is a rendering showing how word square, the southwest corner of the transit center. and the design there has buses going in two different directions. what i want to talk about today is how we are modifying this designed to span across the train's box. as maria mentioned, we are around 35% done in terms of construction documents. we have 35% issued and we expect

to have 65% by springtime. the train box changes impacted us in a few ways. primarily, the ability to take columns down through the tracks is a huge challenge. we met with planning -- we had a meeting last thursday with the project managers, redevelopments officials. everyone was in agreement on going forward with this cable print design. we followed that up with a seismic structural committee on monday. they also concurred that the cable bridge was a good engineering solution for this challenge. we are excited about this. i also want to give you some a visual context and a brief cost schedules as well. structurally, i will just review

the boss for ramp layout, working from south to north connecting the bay bridge. we have a substation on sterling's trade that will be realigned in future designs. -- sterling street that will be realigned in future designs. we also have plans for a burger- type bridge. -- girder-type bridge. going north, we have an embankment along essex street that will be part of a retaining wall system. there will be abutments on both sides of that. the abutment will tie into a viaduct spanning over folsom st., howard, and natomas. this is the area where we are

focusing our changes. the trained box, as of the 35% design in march, as seen in orange, as you know with the changes in high-speed rail, it moved about 100 feet to the south to allow wider turns coming into corners and better design characteristics for high- speed rail. that changed the span to about 200 feet where we could easily put a column through the train box. lots of seismic challenges. so we came up with a cable bridge design that spans from howard across to the trauma. this bridge spans 200 feet from howard street to the transit center. you can see the profile here. this is a preliminary profile. it allows the span across the

entire transit center area. about 300 feet of the cable bridge time into a concrete by doctors. this is a cross-section of the bridge. only about five and half be. that reduces the visual impact. that is good for allowing light in, the bulk of the structure. it is a little bit wider because there are cable anchors on each side. here are the images. this is what we really want to show you today. this is the look from suckeresed howard street. this will be a landscaped area with connections to natoma, the transit center.

you will also see the parcelled building to the right of the towers. that has been integrated with our thoughts on how this would fit into the context of the area. this is a view looking west on natoma through the pedestrian plaza area. a bigger advantage of the cable bridge is it does not extend columns into the area, and as well, operates better with the bike routes underneath. this is the view from second street. here you can see the span across to the bus deck. finally, this is looking from howard street to the north. you can see taxi ramps and bus ramps going down to the lower

concourse. designers are really excited about turning this into an icon of the neighborhood that ties in the transit center, but they are worried about the bulk of the tower, so we will be working with them to get a more graceful design, have a more tie-in structure. right now, the schedule is to spend two months doing the cable bridge design. we will incorporate this into 65% construction documents by next march, final documents by next november. this would lead to a bid for peril, with tjpa approval, putting us around march 2012. that is right on schedule and ties into construction for 2012 through 2015 with the main

building. as far as cost, about $36 million for the bus ramp. this is in line with the estimates. the cable bridge, $10.9 million. the harrison over crossing, the retained sections, that totals about $25 million. so our next up is refining the design, technical details, in the next few months, and we will be back to answer any questions. >> i should also add, peter walker is working with our team to look at the landscaping surrounding the ramp as well. >> ok, any questions? director harper? >> the last i heard about this area -- i did not hear about

spanning the train box or anything -- but there was an issue of the curvature for transit buses, whether there would be enough room. did that address this? >> we already modified the alignment of the curbs. it has been refined since those issues were discussed. i do not think there are any geometry issues. this is the improved version. >> ok, thank you. >> moving on to the report, you will be hearing from steve role on our demolition update. i did want to report last week, we celebrated 5000 hours of demolition with no problems. 5000 hours without incident. we continue on a 100% safe to track record. i would like to have steve give

us an update on the demolition. >> good morning, directors. as the executive director pointed out, that is one of our big milestones. through the end of september, 5000 hours of no incidents whatsoever. safety was a big milestone. we have also completed the phase one demolition and turn the temporary terminal back over to

the contractor to finish up the last portion, the northwest corner. they we mobilized on september 20. we have also gotten into the phase two demolition, removing the building through fremont street. we are 70% into that. that includes removing the remainder of the bus ramps at the beale street crossing, getting into the terminal by us representative. as of yesterday, we started to take down the terminal roof. the yellow areas on your screen our phase one appeared that is now complete. think areas -- pinkz"w on the southern portion of beale street is complete. about 70% leading into the

terminal is complete. here are some photographs of what was accomplished last month. deep shoring that had to go into removing the foundations on the temper terminal site. that is completed. we are now working our way across parcel land, soon to cross beale street. this is the parcel p area. that area has been completely cleared off and is free of debris. i think ac transit is using part of that for bus parking. starting to go across beale street. this was in september. moving on to the complete removal. there you can see beale is

cleared, except for the fed supporting the bridge structure. then moving into the terminal itself. last month, you asked about kraft hours. to date, 605 towers through the end of september. 5614 hours, about 94%. those are bay area numbers. hopefully, those are the numbers you were looking for. on the general timeline, what we discussed last week. things have not changed. i know the versatility packages come before you today. that will be starting up shortly. -- first utility package comes before you today. we will be across freemont street by the end of the month. the upper level deck, across first street by thanksgiving. if there are no questions, that is my presentation. >> any questions?

maybe you have the answer -- i may have to directed to the executive director. in terms of the materials that being recycled in any fashion? >> yes, sir. the steel is being recycled. the concrete is being kept on site to be used as a balanced as contruction goes toward. it will be crushed and used where possible. >> we will have a utility item before you today. on september 15, we open the bid for the sixth utility relocation construction package. we received three qualified bid. all three were small business enterprise contractors, and all were below the engineer's estimate. we will be presenting that for your consideration today. the remaining utility packages will be issued for bids through the end of the year. we expect to have that

completed. they all participation goal. we continue to work with pg&e to push them on their work onnatoma street so that we can have ari attila the contractors complete their work. with respect to buse continue to meet with transit staff to determine current communications systems. we continue to work with caltrans to review the starke project. on1:5bky the temper terminal, ae mentioned, it is now cleared, so we can complete phase two of the terminal. that work is moving along well. with respect to the rail component of the program, we continue to work with trout track -- caltrans and the california high speed authority on the design. we have received formal written letters onyde the agreement andn the platform agreement, layout of the transit center.

we expect the high speed rail authority to formalize the process through a variant. give us the funding of state. y>> good morning. just a brief update on where are with the funding status. on phase one of our $1.59 billion we are expecting,wekauzy $900 million allocated to date. today, there is an item on your million that was just awarded by the san mateo transportation authority. that was done last thursday.

includes stp dollars. 6 f&d+6 matter of getting that funded. on pace to, we mentioned to you last time, two grants pending. they are competitive grants. £4m-lone is out of a high-speedl pot, and that is to keep the phase two work goingl particularly as it relates to environment to work we need to continue that part of the work. !-mv >> director colon? i rg -- director cohen? x about a phased inm75çv4 approaa electrification coming up the peninsula that did not necessarily seem consistent with ]$/p:the strategy we had talked about in treating the entire san

jose to>c&$ñ area as one project. i wonder what the impact of that might look like. .9uzvr>> the only thing i know t ia high the c speed rail authority responded with a letter to caltrain on that issue. i am not sure theøy[g] are on te same page right now. we have not had any involvement 7kuwt: letters go back and forth. >> it might be worthwhile, perhaps gettingr(tq7úr steve ind again as we have in the past, just to check back in. the commitment that we originally had that we would treat the$1 area as one project was important. if there is any deviation from that, i think weuht seriously consider that. seriously consider that. >> director lloyd?