so, we have worked with the sf mta. the first arrows point to increased funding for safety, education, outreach for the build out of the remaining buyout plan projects. providing funds for the next generation of bike projects. leveraging assumptions within the plan, i will give you a couple of examples. proposing to use prop k programming for discretionary brands, like the fund for clean- air and the segment between

interstate 280. undergoing design revisions, the cost is increasing significantly. they fired in march of 2012 in time to complete the project. another tip of the that wanted to mention was prop k for early project development. setting up by projects to be set up for other discretionary fund sources. the proposed amended five ipp includes maps for future design and construction.

federal funds would need to be clear that the festival level. the last two slides just list the project. very briefly, i would go through a couple on this slide, developing the implementation strategy for bike riding. not long term in terms of years, but in terms of what to do with your bike when you are at work overnight. transit applications, witkin park, and the last one there is a match for discretionary grants, programming $400,000 as a match for fund sources,

including the upcoming area grant. with no specific projects mentioned in this line, the funding sources for project eligibility, noting the last thing on the slide is the allocation of these funds prior to allocation. on page 42 of the packet is the acknowledged change. page 44, and attachment for were that lists the attached ipp and which projects are new. with that, i can take questions.

also noting that all of the project sponsors are in this category are [unintelligible] supervisor campos: thank you for your presentation. colleagues, and questions? supervisor chu: thank you for explaining the approach in terms of identifying projects on the horizon. the great highway on your radar , there have been efforts to reach envision that area and also think about how it is that we create a bike path along that area. >> not currently proposed, it could certainly be used, speaking to those ongoing

efforts. >> in response to that question, we are involved with at the portion of great highway -- i am trying to think of the name of the restaurant there. i should have remembered that. in terms of the erosion in the by facility, as the project develops there is a lot of jurors to show boundary in the area. we are open to enhancing the

facilities line. >> good morning, commissioners, mr. chairman. the lead on the project so far has been the department of public works. the last thing that i recall about them, after the stabilization project, which we are also attracting, there was a discussion about what would be feasible in terms of converting portions of the road to the extent that it is ongoing. there was the initial thought that if the road would be shaped, it would present a bike

path there. question and the geography and how much of the road, how much does that free up for the bike paths belloc's going back to do more research on that, there is a legitimate concern in what the role of that would be for the bicycle network. we will give you an update on that in the next meeting. >> -- supervisor chu: the former department of public works had has been a great proponent and a member of the mta. to the extent that there is connectivity, this is a broader

conversation, seeing whether or not there is a way to bring recommendations from the ocean beach planning process. if i could ask the mta to follow up on that? >> very good. thank you. supervisor avalos: a question about the recent enforcement of cycling rules. i have seen the mta doing the work of making sure that cyclists, having paid for with prop k funds -- >> you would have to ask someone from the mta about how it might be funded. supervisor avalos: the rules of the road on cycling? >> i cannot speak to that.

i can get back you on how the increase might be funded. >> in the prior item, there were 800 that would not pay for enforcement, but as a fee is a partner in the program warning motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. >> -- supervisor avalos: the key part, there is this perception of people riding in by clients that they have the right of way and it is hard to see sign image to know that there are crosses going on. are there other markers plan to slow down the cycling in key

intersections? >> someone had raised that very issue on market street. how do people pullover safety to the curb without giving run over? supervisor avalos: mta? >> sure. the short answer to the question is yes, we are all concerned over the issues regarding education and enforcement issues. there is an old saying that you cannot fix -- use a bad designed to fix a bad design. our goal is to do things that are intuitive, when they make sense. we do meet regularly with the

traffic co. and are going through comprehensive solution evaluation so that they do not feel so haphazard and about equitable to the users on the street. in terms of figuring out how we enforce those designs, we're working for a closely with taxis, except those services, and transit folks, to come up with a good bulletin to help everyone figure out how to use those lanes effectively. at the moment, those of the many prone to strategies that we have outside of our purview. so, we can do with the design piece, working to try to influence and coordinate. does that answer your question?

supervisor avalos: i would like to have an off line conversation with you about that. thanks. supervisor wiener: by wanted to say, and this goes for vehicles as well as bikes, one of the things we definitely have not done in terms of consistent enforcement, and focusing on to key tacky. over and over again, i did e- mails saying that this intersection is dangerous, cars are running stop signs. the police station, all of a sudden, has enforcement that last for a few weeks.

just having understandably limited resources there are some basic things that you have to do to have safer roads. we just haven't done that. that is not a good way to do it. supervisor campos: colleagues, and the other questions? anything else from staff? let's open it up to public comment. is there any other member of the public that would like to speak? >> candy, san francisco bicycle coalition.

i would like to thank staff and others, hard work, going through this, getting into a place to bring it back to you. as you heard folks say, this is really about timing. this is a bit of getting through the last generation. we are headed into a new generation, literally, moving away from simple stripes to separate things toward truly separated bikeways. i hope that all of you will be able to come to the green room tonight, 6:00 p.m.. we have experts in the netherlands, talking with us about programs and facilities, encouraging education and enforcement, ultimately.

as we come toward programming projects that are wonderful and welcoming, we will have to do it in a different way. we will be talking, all of us, about how we program money coming forward. meeting that master planning effort, the project that we approved that was consistent with what was coming forward, i am pleased that we are harmonizing where we have been with the decisions that we have made. again, we're very supportive of this. it will just get more interesting from this point. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you. are there any other members of the public that would like to speak? seeing no one, public comment is closed. >> i think that this is very keen, and it was touched on in

one way or another, regarding sign image, it is really, ultimately, like what was being said. a question of awareness and enforcements about sharing the road. i am sure that this evening has people talking about the netherlands, rome, but it could be said about paris, anywhere. the program is a strong component of raising public awareness of the fact that bicycles are here to stay and will be increasing in numbers. drivers have a real responsibility to look out for pedestrians and for bikers. they are going to be on the road. it cannot be the result of not

knowing that there was a bike lane there. i am a big advocate for increasing the amount of effort put into an awareness for change. i think it is the future. when that happens, it will be interesting. true, if they have an intuitive reading of what an intersection looks like, they do not have to worry about too much. the geometry on the streets, blockages of one sort or another. you still cannot get to them, if people are aware of the responsibility they have to the

vehicle. ultimately, you see places like berlin, paris, where bikes are mixed in traffic. still, the accident rate is low because of the awareness report working. the fact that we are in the middle of an ideological argument over what constitutes appropriate transportation, it does not bode well, but at least at the local level we have the ability to demonstrate the right paradigm. thank you. supervisor chu: -- supervisor campos: colleagues, you have heard the presentation. this is an action item.

we will take it without objection. madam clerk, please call the next item. >> item #6. recommend allocation of $4,132,911 in prop k funds, with conditions, for ten requests, subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules, and amendment of the new and upgraded streets 5-year prioritization program. this is an action item. >> this item starts on page 379 of your packet. we have a power point, then chad will complete the presentation. we had $4 million in funds requested for the project. leveraging $31.5 million in non- prop k funds. the annual request is something that we receive every year. an amount negotiated a month

partnering agencies in san francisco. the agency is responsible, since 2003, having created four prop k categories that need to provide that left -- and we need to accelerate prop k fairly heavily. every year we have to jump through hoops to get current number. when they needed to buy to each county, we had to use the disproportionate prop k project.

we still use the full amount for each county. so, the request, $3.3 million, want to make note that the equipment program fulfill a commitment to allocate the remaining requests. they were committed to allocate for the fiscal year. and a few questions about the cost of the help train budget. included in there, and it has

endangered and unprotected species out in that area. they are obligated to do an environmental project. >> in reference to 19th adding leverage between avenues, this project implements the 19th avenue park presidio plan to adopt by mid july of 2011. the authority board allocated

$120,000 for a portion of this project. every time there is a construction project at the end of this year, they will likely begin the fourth quarter of 11 or 12, with a budget expected to be complete by 2013. >> good evening, commissioners. i will briefly be talking about the allocation requests. $85,000 in funds for the station, the project involves the paved area of the station. design work will be completed

during 2012 or during design work, with construction of the project at $500,000 to be completed as a quick schematic. p.s. 78 is requesting $20,000 for the addition of class to bike lanes from 13th street to 19th street. creating room for by civil disabilities, the neat thing about this project is that after that part is completed, all of the way from the embarcadero,

bike lanes will be done by the summer of 2012. finally, the sf mta has requested 1200 for a bike way on jfk drive. in april they allocated additional funds for planning and design work on the project after learning of further coordination necessary for support for a specific project. there remain if you design details to work out and a final number for the parking lot. to outfit the parking lot, as 78

will take it out to the finance authority on october 25. because of the required approvals not yet being met, they are recommending conditioning the allocation for jfk with expenses for construction and those bodies being met for the final design of the project. the project should take between six weeks to eight weeks to complete. with that, folks, staff members from all project can come back up. supervisor avalos: any early indication on how the concourse authority would stand? on the controversy? >> not unless someone from the sf mta wants to come up.

we did receive a letter of support. supervisor avalos: great. sf mta? >> we have been to the capitol committee of the commission. thanks to the good work of the sf bc, the new chair is a converted cyclist. he came through the park, even though we laid out clearly the parking impact. we do not have a 100% by-in. also, reaching out to members of the authority, we have not been

able to get a clear read on how they're going to stand on the project. the ford comes before the court's authority, we will be back to the sub-committee before we go back to the commission. we need to work hard to make sure everyone is on the same page before this project comes before us. supervisor chu: did you say that we would be losing 100 parking spots? >> the number is somewhere between 75 and 100 lost. we have done a lot of work to go back through the park and reinstate some parking spaces.

red zones that were put in place. that was the balance. looking at the parking that will be removed or added back, there will be a net loss. in terms -- supervisor chu: in terms of moving forward, i have concern over losing that many parking spots. i understand that there's a need for greater bicycle access in the area. what about the concourse of authority and the loss of that many parking spaces? the capital committee and your entire board yet? >> we go before them in late october. prio t