people the idea this is a major pedestrian, bicycle quarter. they give a diversity of street types that help people know immediately whether they are and where they are in the context of the bigger site, as opposed to an anonymous replication of the same kind of street-odd angles. again, emphasizing the better streets plan is such an important design mechanism, helping us design not just at the service level, but looking at substrate elements, looking at sustainability, looking at sustainable landscaping. i argue that landscaping is transportation commission. if you put services and businesses within walking distance of home, it is so much easier for people never to have to bring their cars out to take their kids to day care, to school, the corner store for milk. while we talk about transportation as pedestrian, bike, transit, and cars, land use is a big part of it. giving people neighborhood-scale services within a block or two

of their residences is a san francisco tradition and one being proposed in this project as well. these are just images showing in addition to the design of the streets, we're looking at design of the buildings that face the streets. one major accomplishment here -- people talk about parkmerced as having the effect of a gated community, and there are only very limited access points. what you will see in the proposal is that we create new intersections that allow pedestrians to cross between parkmerced and the lake merced area appeared on the southwest corner, there is a major axis point to the recreation area from brotherhood way, which would be a major axes point.

also in the southeast corner, where there is the -- right now, there is this sort of cloverleaf between brotherhood way, we make sure that this pedestrian connection safely get you across their here and help you get to the churches on that corridor as well as going across highway one into the existing omi neighborhood. >> before you leave that slide, i did not want to let that be the northeast corner with the transit plaza is going to be -- you cannot skip over the walking benefit. not to say that this is the solution to all things, but, you know, the six, seven years i have been on the board, the number of pedestrian fatalities we have had at that intersection because of the transit. now with transit on the left side. just that pedestrian benefit alone and the walking that happens, you are not going to have it as congested with

pedestrians. it will be a heck of a lot safer. >> actually, he is stealing my thunder. there are multiple benefits for the outer 19th avenue alignment. let me just blow it up into a bigger picture so you can see what the supervisor points out. pedestrian access to and from the neighborhood is one thing. pedestrian access to and from major transit hubs is critical to pedestrian safety. as we talked about the tep and better streets, i want to point out that this was a time when our by plan was in joined in we were able to make a lot of progress on innovation and new ideas for bicycle facilities that we have not really put in place yet in that time of enjoyment. the to the best state of the our bicycle practices, mixed use half that allows buses and pedestrians to share with ample space. all of those were able to be embedded in the bicycle plant of this project, taking a bandage of what was happening in the

bicycle plant at 28. you will see a major boulevard is the one that skirts the open space on the southern side of the project is also a bicycle boulevard. we also have throughout the site by sharing -- bike sharing. bike schering and cars sharing are two of the requested elements that you saw in josh's slide. what you are also seeing is that where parkmerced stood between san francisco university and the bart station, you will see how bicycle lanes start to connect from university through the gateway to the census go -- or from san francisco university to the bar area. i'm going to drill down to show you what i'm talking about here is one of the mitigation measures we worked with said you need to make sure that pedestrians and bicyclists can safely cross streets. level of service really only

measures automobiles moving through intersections. we have a priority on bicycle and pedestrian safety and transit reliability. wherever we can tweak an intersection that looks like it was getting in trouble to make it more say for bicycles and pedestrians, we did. what you see here is that there used to be a half -- this is the current half, the current situation now, of automobiles that were using the cloverleaf to cross what would be the bicycle path to get on the highway here analysis shows we can accommodate the traffic pattern in a way that does not necessarily -- also what that says is it actually challenges the lead time. if you are coming off highway one, trying to go east, you are crossing traffic with very short distance getting off and getting onto highway 1. our solution and to eliminate that conflict is to have traffic going left from brother of a way, very simple, very straightforward, no need for a 1940's-style cloverleaf. we have freed up a safe, bicycle

and pedestrian path from the corner of project out towards the daly city bart station. by eliminating the cloverleaf, we have three bicycles circulation without a single automobile conflict. that is the example of mitigation measures that our rights plan was able to help us accomplish. so i talked again about breaking down the slope of gated community feeling. look at these intersections where there are now pedestrian access points. out said the transit plaza, but also at points along the project. here is a much more detailed scale. every one of those circles indicates a new, safer crosswalk. to really make sure that this project is integrated into the greater san francisco, rather than separated by highways. this intersection pulled out -- i think you saw a graphic of this. what i want to emphasize here is there is a huge recreational facility right across the

street. this allows pedestrians to walk down to that intersection, but it also allows a mixed use half, so bicyclist have a true crosswalk that lets them get safely across the boulevard, out to the major destination area. it is nice to see that transportation is not just a journey to work, but also home, to recreation. i think you will see similar refinements throughout the internal document and other mitigation measures. again, here, a very tough intersection to cross right now. we use the street car crossing to help us build a safer and more direct crosswalk across 19th avenue. this is the transit plaza. you can see now the trains come out of the middle of 19th avenue, everybody getting off the train heading west, which is about 90% of the people here in front door access for san

francisco state, and making sure that while we do that, we redesign the crosswalk. you can see the bulls flaring out, at the same time giving up for your-way crosswalk, giving a much more prominent marketing to help traffic and pedestrians navigate the intersection safely. the last symbol of the mitigation measures that zeroed in on pedestrian and bicycle safety is on the very northwest corner. right now, there are no crosswalks. you can see the diagram to the left, that run on the bottom. cars making that right turn have no indication they are crossing into a residential street. our recommended proposal is a traffic refuge and crosswalk that helps people walk safely to and from the recreation area to the west. is it mitigation measures that goes beyond and looks at pedestrian and bicycle safety. there are some key parts of the project.

this is something that helps us. we are going to be operating more frequent buses in the area. that is part of our plan. we know we need all the help we can to give people attractive options. shuttle provided by the project sponsor really helps us make sure they are going from the heart of the neighborhood to daily city, but, out along the west side, and down to left leg. right now, there is no self- service feared this gives everybody won a shopping destination -- everybody who wants a shopping destination a free far right. >> how often does that shuttle run? >> the scheduling of that is, i think, the most important thing the developer can do. look at demand and look at savings and scale in the amount of shuttle service that is there. the beauty of that is they have the ultimate freedom to run the shuttle as frequently as they like. the connection between revenues that come into the project and sustaining the shuttle are

entirely within control of the project. what we would do is make sure they are looking at some bankers like this. the muni rail line will come in. this is the proposal we have now. this is what we are proposing. we are really proposing two versions. i would recommend that the department sponsor continue to work closely with us, and you will hear about that in my discussion, to match the frequency of the shuttle with the frequency of this . we are creating a line that starts at present and a line that continues beyond into the neighborhood. do we like this? is this a project we think helps enhance our service? i will point to two indications of how it does. first of all, by taking the streetcar out of the middle of 19th avenue, we can but landscaping and better pedestrian crossings in the middle, and the pedestrian amenity as well. i would like to drill down again on these two things. the transit plaza, where san

francisco state and park ridge said enjoy transportation out of ninth avenue. i did not talk much about the track to the right. that gives us a tailor shop. we have no place that allows us to take a malfunctioning train out of service without screwing up the whole operation of our line. we can take that train out of the way, and will also start pointing toward a long-term goal of our own, which is a light rail to board connection that helps everybody in san francisco. with is an attractive the operational in the short term, but allows us to be able to ensure that long-term connections are still there. again, here is the full picture of lansky boulevard, veteran service, and short and long and in connection to daly city by. i would like to take a step back, and this is near the end of my transportation

presentation. i appreciate your patience, but it is important to go back to 19th avenue because this is probably one of the most challenging corridors in the city. what i found, when you look at the city from a 30,000-foot level is part merced is pretty close to two transportation hubs. what you do not know, when you get off one of those rail systems and try to walk, is how complicated that is. if you get off that daly city bar and try to ride a bike or walk to present, you are met with basically a highway, cloverleaf, a lot of materials, and eat you get off at the ocean view stop, you are, as i said, in the middle of 19th avenue were 100% of the people have to deal with freeway-levels of traffic. we would like to make this not just a chance it crossed project, but a transit-oriented projects. the corridor study has helped us learn a lot.

for instance, 19th avenue is a regional street. regional roadway. it is not affected so much by growth of a project. it is affected by growth in the bay area. san francisco just happens to be in the middle of it. this diagram is really showing that san francisco's population growth, which is fairly slow, and we have seen an increase since 1990 -- it is kind of leveling at about the 800,000 range. this is 19th ave. between 1965 and 2005, it has grown up over 370%. is much more and an animal of growth in the region and it is a san francisco. need to be thinking about transportation solutions that address regional transportation as well as local. here is where i'm going to skip ahead to talk a little bit about the 19th avenue corridor this way. the study that we have been

working on for three years allowed us to look at 19th avenue in a series of four tiers. the first was to sit with is the growth happening in 30 years if there were no major projects? just background. tier two has about a layer on top of that. we layer all those numbers, but we did not put their transportation solutions in the mix. we just looked at the numbers of jobs and housing, and then we studied the quota and saw that it actually got more congested. transit slowed down more. we went to tier 3, and we, as public agencies, all have recommendations and designs on the corridor. we lay those on top. we put that in the mix and saw that it did not make that much difference in level of service. but then, which and tier four, which is all the recommendations i have described, plus the

improvements that the project sponsors propose themselves. we did see some benefit there. when i talked about the new intersections opening up, what we saw was the level of service passing, meaning suddenly, those extra intersections help disperse the traffic and reduce the pressure on one interception. what i would like to make it what about here more than anything is the limits of level of service measures. it is not an indication of pedestrians safely getting across the street. it is not an indication of bicycles navigating a neighborhood safely. it does not really tell us how transit can operate more reliably or more quickly through a corridor, so while we appreciate the benefits of the 19th avenue corridor study, we know that we need to look at pedestrian safety, will ability, bike-ability, and faxes. what if we as agencies working

together all sat around a table and said knowing what we know, what could we do to make this corridor better than it is now and suddenly better than what it will be in 30 years? i will give you some examples of what we found out. let's say that is the project proposal with the rail alignment. here are some of the key features. you see the transit plaza at the top. that is a pedestrian entrances improvement. people can get on and off the train without having to cross. that also has the felix of a new rail extension, which allows them to cross back over. here is a tier 5 concept that seems to be hitting the target for everybody interested, including the community, and g- 8, and transit provided by caltrans and bart. if we took that streetcar, and

it came along the west side of 19th avenue, all the way through parkmerced, which is part of the master plan, if we took the crossings, and it was no longer happening at 19th avenue, all of those, which our religion is of figuring out could be feasible with a certain cost estimate and schedule and design process, we then could build much faster, much reliable, and still serve the heart of parkmerced and benefit everybody on the southwest side of sentences appeared here is an idea that helped make this not just an idea, but a potential funding reality here the project sponsor looking to pay for the rail alignment. capturing those segments that you see in orange and the cost equivalent of those, and asking the project sponsor to work with us beyond the approval, help us get to tier 5, is to say let's

bank that amount of money and called that a local match and make tier 5 the bigger better picture that we know we need because we know how bad it will be if we do nothing. this is one indication, but there is so much more than the rail. there are regional bike paths, which it helped make real. because we separate the line, we could make it a rail, but, pedestrian corridor that gets directly to daly city. we can look at pedestrian safety projects. we can be technologically smart communicate signals up and down the corridor. we are working on that now. there are other friday as we are open to because we're just now kicking off the tier 5 planning process. you saw this breakdown of tears one through four. here are the presentations of the presentation i am giving.

where we have been with this 19th avenue corridor planning process is as i said, and in 2008, we launched the study. we establish something call priority development areas, which means that by designating this area, as we found with some other areas of sand and cisco, we are now eligible for regional money that non-designated areas are not. in 2009 and 2010, we convened our first traffic study working group to make sure that we brought caltrans, bart, mta together to figure out the best way to go forward. we published our study in 2010. that gave us the analysis and data we needed. we then convened our interagency planning group to start mapping out what projects, bicycle, transit, pedestrian make a lot of sense here we had 25 community meetings specifically focused on tier 5 between 2008

and now, and a lot of the ideas you have seen reflect the neighborhoods. even st. stephen's paris gave us a strong recommendations about what they see pierre whatever but it lacks is the idea that they did not have to upset 19th avenue the way it is going to go, this is our opportunity to hit it that and turn it into a livable quarter. we submitted an application for $300,000 to actually do a few multi-level deliver voice, to get us in here. these are what we are proposing with that study. it will be led by the transportation authority, but we will be sponsoring it. we submitted the application in 2011. the outcomes would be extensive community meetings reviewing the

project and making sure that everyone understands that is clear and transparent. we would define the project. you saw the short list, but there are many more, and they definitely need to be refined and well-defined. we came up with a cost estimate using engineers to make sure that these are feasible, indebted proposals. we would model results to make sure that the data and the outcomes are in the direction we want to be, and ultimately what we get at the end is a psr-ready implementation project. at the conclusion of the study, we would be able to give them a set of drawings that they could less and would suddenly open the door to making it a reality. supervisor mar: how many of those community meetings to review the proposals have been held so far? >> the 25 have been held.

between 2008 -- when we started talking about tier 5 and started launching a whole section on community meetings about what it would take, i created a matrix with all the interests of different community members as well. supervisor mar: so those meetings have been pretty much all held between 2010 and 2011? >> between 2009 and 2011. supervisor cohen: were all these community meetings held in english? >> yes. supervisor cohen: was their translation available? >> no, there were no translation services requested, but i am excited about the idea of using the planning money to help us supplement because we know there is a definite language -- especially in the western reaches, the north part of the project area, there is a very high population asian demographic. the planning money allows us to avoid the transit services that

we could not manage up until this point. supervisor mar: i would support the suggestion that multilingual services and good out rich, so that it is engaging different populations, especially limited english speakers as well. >> i do want to emphasize how excited we are about that. to have the planning grant also helps us qualify for environmental justice. this is an environmental justice community. there is a strong population of filipino and asian people who have not really been actively involved in community meetings because of language barriers. we hope to break that down with this planning process. caltrans has an environmental justice planning grant program. supervisor cohen: congratulations on getting that grant. it is very exciting, but as you can imagine, this is important, and i am concerned that the outreach you have done has been

primarily done in english, thus excluding the asian speaking members of the community. but going forward -- >> i do need to clarify. there has not been an official launch of the process. we submit it for march. it would be the official beginning. we were with communities who approached us and said they wanted to your specifically what we were doing about 19th avenue, about park ridge said. we used the meeting to say, "here is the project, but here is tier 5, and we want your ideas early on. the important thing is that the process begins as soon as the planning money comes in, and i would like to make sure that we're not locked too much to what we heard in the past, that we are still open to reinventing what it looks like. supervisor cohen: i understand that the 25 groups came to you, but generally, the folks that ask for the plan are the most educated, with the resources to

engage in the system. naturally, it you do not speak english, you will not be inclined to reach out to the agency, or in this case, the city department, to ask questions. so i just want to impress upon you -- >> very good. supervisor cohen: the importance of a multilingual approach from this point forward. >> i want to call attention to the slide because you are spot on on that. this is the last slide on my presentation. he looked at the last bullet, it is about in line of justice. requirements are two major we have multilingual out reach, that you make sure you identify the communities with language as an issue, and i would say it is not just chinese or tagalog. there's also a fairly strong russian-speaking group as well. we expect there to be community outreach that reflects the community, looks

demographically as the make up and does not allow language to be a barrier to the infant. that is part of what this last flight was supposed to wrap up. i want to talk about a few things. all the projects in development that you saw, the very orientation have been pointed toward tier 5. we work with the sponsors said that it was not just about making a project work better, but about making the whole project work better, so the very shape has been free engineered to look toward tier 5. the priority development area -- i talked about that as enhancing our funding certainty. that element of putting the money into the rail alignment -- if we are smart, and hopefully we are, we are calling that overmatched, making sure that while the federal government requires a 20/80 split -- 20% local, 80% federal -- if we are gearing toward a 50/50 split, we jump ahead of competing applications because we have a much higher local share.

we also get extra credit if we are a local regional project. this is a local regional projects. we are right on the county limits. that will help our project score better. we get extra points if we are tod, which we are. we get extra points if we are managing congestion. our funding targets, in addition to environmental justice and economic development for low- income communities -- also, held the safety access to transportation. we know that there is a growing crisis with health, especially with youth. the ability to ride a bicycle is compromised by an automobile- oriented development. we think the project lens itself well to a host of grants that are not classic transportation grants, but about healthy, active living, and giving people transportation options that are by foot or by bicycle. we also look at carbon dioxide emission reductions.

this will provide that because we will see some many more people in transit. the classic transportation funding sources are the transportation grants we will get from the federal government, specifically because we are a priority development area, but also, we are working closely with the loan model at the shipyard that allows us to work with the federal government to get a loan to invest in transportation infrastructure as long as there is a strong quebec system built into the project. you will hear shortly about the infrastructure -- as long as there is a strong payback system built into the project. you will hear shortly about the infrastructure. i just wanted to show you that we are throwing our canvas as wide and clear as we can to capture all the grants that could be eligible, not just classic transportation, but transportation loans, environmental justice, health and safety, and carbon emissions. all of these square really well

with the study, and at this point, i would like michael to get up and talk more about it -- supervisor mar: i would like to say the supervisor elsbernd made great points at the supervisors hearing, and you have laid out very clearly all these great opportunities and the planning process, but back to supervisor cohen's point, i think is great that the grants will be available and we will utilize them to engage low-income communities of color and multilingual planning processes, but if we already have had 25 community meetings, there is no excuse that they should have all been in english only, and there should have been for lack of outrage, if you already knew there is a russian-speaking population. there is no excuse for english- only meetings in the southern part of the city, and that has such a multilingual population. i strongly support supervisor cohen