square footage exemption. the square footage exemption is currently being proposed at 800 square feet. if you were adding a laundry room, that would be exempted. we're still analyzing exactly what the right number is in terms of the exemption. we are trying to focus in on what point are we generating a new impact in terms of what is the relationship between net new square footage of the impact? commissioner farrell: curious on the residential feet, have you started to do our reach at all? -- fee, have you started to do outreach at all? >> yes, we have. i think that it is fair to say that people understand and appreciate the policy objectives and how concerned with the immediate financial impact of the residential fee.

it is primarily an issue more outside of the eastern neighborhoods and market octavia, because residential fees already applied there, and because it is already been paid, it is not much of a new impact. so i sing the square footage exemption is important, and the policy discounts that i will go over with you are also important in terms of meeting those concerns. so, on that points, potential policy discounts. as we put to good this program and have received a wide variety of feedback, we have presented this item to the planning commission and the mta board. we've been getting feedback around the desire to encourage particular way it used types or incur ridge particular policies by providing a waiver or reduction of feet under this program -- of fee under this

program. this would be < allowable maximum parking. we of zoning districts where there are maximal allowing parking. potential fee waiting for affordable housing up to 100% and constraint on the policy discount program is that it cannot exceed $40 million in value over 20 years. if we exceed $40 million in value, we put a wrist to apply the expenditure program, and because that is serving as a way for the project to premeditate impact of it is very important we build and implement the program as it has been identified and modeled. so that still leaves us with a substantial amount of funding to apply discounts. we are of course seeking feedback from the commission today on the correct application

of discounts come and whether there is something we missed in this so far. whatever direction week it will then be implemented through the draft ordinance, which we're going to introduce in a couple of weeks, maybe three weeks. in terms of implementation of the program -- commissioner olague: i was glad to ask, a couple of years ago, and i do not know if this is still in play, there was a fee of around area plans. is that still in place? >> it is still in place. it expires, i believe, in the fall of this year. i would have to confirm, but it is expiring but with the police soon. in order for to be reenacted thought it would require positive action by the board of supervisors. in terms of how we have analyzed funding available -- availability and what have we can start to implement the

project, we assume it will continue to be in place. if it were not in place, it would obviously mean funding would be available to the program earlier than with the referral program. commissioner olague: ok. commissioner farrell: 100% c wfee waivers, how are you defining affordable housing? >> at this point we're using the definitions as they have already been identified in other areas. we have fee waivers in the plan impact waivers. i do not remember what it is. maybe it is 85% of ami. i can get the specifics around that, but we are chosen at this point not to reinvent the wheel. we can update the definition according to the dialogue as well. commissioner farrell: the price

per square foot, $5.53 for residential. how was that calculated? how did you come up with that? >> that was calculated through the nexus study. the nexus identified what the impact of the transportation system from development, the cost essentially to providing that necessary transportation service to this new development, and based on the cost calculation we identified if you are building a residential developer of project, this is the cost impact to the system, and then we pulled that a proportionate share out and identified $5.53 per growth per square foot. commissioner farrell: can you forward a copy of the index's steady to my office -- nexus study to my office? >> absolutely.

it is being finalized now. we will get it to you when it is finalized. and when to go back to implementation. the program is propose to follow the city standard capital programming process in terms of implementation. we do have a steady comprised of transportation staff, mta staff and planning staff. the planning department's role is to make sure we're meeting the regulatory requirement in terms of offsetting the impact of growth. projects would be included in the relevant agency's budget and go through the process including review or approval at the board of supervisors. we buiwill be required every fie years to update the study. we will be required to update the environmental review to make sure the developmental assumptions are accurate and look at how the expenditure plans are performing against

what the assumptions are in the sure we do not need any modifications or to adjust as necessary as we are going. we also felt like it was important for this program to be in very close collaboration with the prop k program. most of the funding, much of the funding is levered throughout proper k. -- with prop k. it will be reviewed at the board of supervisors every five years and update the steady and in our mental review. -- environmental review. we begin initial stakeholder are reached laoutreach last year. we are expecting to have an ordinance for introduction in march. it will take about 18 months to complete. once we get through the in our

mentenvironmental review, we wil bring it to the board of supervisors for review and potential adoption. likely in the fall of 2013. i am available for questions. commissioner avalos: thank you so muchl . you probably touched upon this, but if you could reiterate to the extent your plan is opposed, how was that different from how funds are expended in the program is implemented with the courage fee? >> it has historically been used as a source to provide increased transit service to offset the impact of development, and so that has meant his has gone into muni's operating budget. commissioner avalos: that goes in the budget and not specific? it is not programmed in any

particular way or head way and we have bike improvements? >> if my understandimy address s been used to fund transit service. to provide operator salaries or whatever else is necessary to provide necessary trades as service. the t.s.f. would be much more constrained in its use. we would be allocating funding to specific routes the disturbing to offset the impact of growth. there is funding available for preventive maintenance, but that is a transit reliability issue to make sure we of the vehicles available to provide the service, fixing overhead lines, etc. i think it is fair to say the use of the funds under this program would be more transparent than what we experience today. commissioner avalos: that is always good to hear. thank you.

is there an expected built up between what the current the -- is there an expected delta between what the current fee is and what we can expect? to go about $20 millio>> i thin8 million over 20 years. increased revenue under the new program. commissioner avalos: great. thank you. commissioner ofolague. commissioner olague: the graduated fee impacts, can you be more specific? how does this look? >> i do not get have the details on exactly what the percentages would be. but we are looking at is 50% discount if you build -- let's

say the maximum is one to 1.5, but that will be more clear as to finalize the ordinance the implements this. commissioner olague: i am wondering if this would include if they decide to go with less than the parking requirement. would there be some consideration given to bike parking or city sharing, will any of it be factored in somehow? >> it is a really interesting idea. it is one we've been talking about internally as well. how'd we recognize projects that are supporting the multi-modal goals. we're still trying to figure out exactly how it can apply anti discount would be meaningful. that is something we're talking about. commissioner olague: i am not

suggesting we go around discounting and end up without the revenue we need to support increased muni service, but i think if there is increase consideration given to the other issues, it might be good. congestion pricing come is that something we're still looking at? -- could just increasingestion t something we're still looking at? >> i should the transportations that refer to that. commissioner olague: i am interested in the topic. it is an obsession. >> we probably need to bring you an update. the one thing i would point out is we do have come in addition to the efforts that have been ongoing of the federal grant that we finished last year that was called the mobility and

pricing study, we have an effort currently underway, which is part of the development agreement of ther, and we will discuss that with the staff anin the weeks to come. in addition to the ongoing efforts to try to secure funding for studies and so on. commissioner olague: thank you. commissioner avalos: great. one last question for me, and that is on the discounts -- capital discounts of $40 million. i think it might make sense that it is like a yearly allotment, that the cap can exceed to greater amounts come a greater time or perhaps the to

cap -- you say it is only sustainable at 40 million, but perhaps there is another way to look at it. i think it is support to have it over many years. >> thank you. what we've been looking at is like a prop m office allocation to make sure we're not exceeding the amount of allowable. we've also been considering tying it to an expense, rather than an actual dollar value, because that would help as meter the program as opposed to what growth is happening. commissioner avalos: think you for your presentation. if there are no other questions, we can go on to public comment. -- thank you for your presentation. if any member of the public would like to comment, please come forward. >> andy zorley.

we of the talking about this for a very long time. i am looking at commissioner olague and getting rid of o.l.s. as a process of ceqa. this body really got the conversation going in 2005. it is exciting. and try to pace myself. we have some time to go even if things go well. i do want to think of 40 staff and planning department and the mta and the mayor's office for pushing along on this. -- i do want to think the staff, and planning department and the mta and the mayor's office. it is also a great opportunity and obligation to rationalize our impact fees. that is a good thing, to. o.

i'm really encouraged to see the great questions coming from the committee. these are questions that will h we will have time to ask, but the more we ask, the better the program will be. a very much looking forward to seeing the draft ordinance, and that will be a draft and devolve a little bit. on the notion of outreach, we it to talk to as many people as we can about this. let's keep this going and get this done. commissioner avalos: thank you. next speaker, please. >> right now, in the city and county of san francisco we have very few areas where we can have that big developments, so we have one area right now that you commissioner should go and

review and see what is happening right now, and what can happen in this area three years from now, five years from now, 20 years from now, and that is mission bay. just see how well you have performed on mission bay. the second area where outreach should be done. where meaningful data should be given to the people is the area here, it may be hunters point -- maybe hunter's point, sunnydale. we do not need to go everywhere. these are the kind of ideas that are used in other countries, but a kind of difficulare kind of dn

san francisco because of various factors, one of them being the hills and another because how the city was planned. thirdly, over the past 20 years we need to find out of a vigil history othe financial history . i know they are projecting the data and a conceptual way. how well are they going to do? commissioners, you have not asked any benchmarks, and i suppose you cannot come up because some of the documentation tied to it is not available. it is going to be available in the queue days or few weeks. so i would say we need a hearing

on this. thank you very much. commissioner avalos: thank you very much. if there are no other members of the public that would like to comment, we can close public comment. madam clerk of information i. >> recommendation of allocation of 209,514 in propek k funds. this is an action item. >> i am a planner with the authority for this item which has request from the mta and on page 43 of the packet. my colleagues will present on the traffic comi calming reques that will be followed by a presentation. sfmta is requesting a long-term

bike storage plant. some of the tasks include a review of best practices and codes that could inhibit it -- the needs assessment and a final report. through this project we will work with other agencies as well as perform public are reached through surveys and interviews in forming a final strategy that will be outlined in a final report. staff will perform all labor position diassisted with the pr the final strategy from the plan will guide the sfmta in the future of bike planning projects. commissioner avalos: thank you for your presentation. >> welcome.

i am going to spend one minute to give you a quick overview on the five-year prioritization program that is significant for the item. this body approves every few years but includes a prioritization methodology for the categories in the project were they all work together. it is supposed to have a five- year project list with full funding plans. today this item is about the traffic coming category come in this is one of the categories where prop k provided the first able funding. the authority has a long history of this. in 1998 be a story -- the authority board adopted a strategic analysis report that was developed in close coordination with the mta.

that laid the foundation for them to develop the traffic coming progralming program. we will give you quick overview of the item before you. most of offices have been briefed on this, but because of the extremely important role that prop k plays, you will have a final call on approving the traffic to shift the focus between the local traffic calming projects and school tracks in light of the next five years worth of programs. >> ben stepa. i will do a brief overview of the allocation request that is before you today, and mike sells very well due representation in state of the current program. -- mike salbury.

this is a request to about your weight the trevaluate the traffg program, and looking at the way products are delivered to the community. we give an overview of the history of the traffic calming froprogram, but it does have three tracks. what is the local neighborhood track that is delivering speed reduction projects to local communities and local streets. there is a track that is currently used to fund the participation in larger part arterial projects. the final track is the school track, which is providing local map funding.

the effort that mta is undertaking is really rebalancing the program to focus on newly-identified city objectives in terms of pedestrian safety. as you know, the mayor recently set up a pedestrian safety task force, and that task force did some analysis, and we gave you the methodology in the analysis and it is in the package for you and stuff to look at. in that analysis, the majority of high-injury collisions is bound to be on arterial. so this is really an effort to look at the traffic c calmin calming program in to sef we can use resources to look at those issues on arterial. this is not totally reviewing

the program, just rebalancing the program. in terms of the request itself, the project will begin in march of this year and end by january of next year. it does require a small amendment to the five-year prioritization program to create a new project to allow for the funds in this specific project. in the projects that will be funded out of this program after the request will have to be preceded by a comprehensive amendment to the entire five- year prioritization program, so that would be something that comes before this committee, and you would understand how the new a valuation effects the five- year prioress stati prioritizat with that, i will turn it over to mike for his presentation on the whole program. >> migood morning, commissioner.

many of its mike salibury. as staff has mentioned some i will give a brief overview of the program prior to the decision about the allocation. this slide, if you have the information printed out in front of you, this outlines the goals of traffic calming. improving pedestrian bike safety, increased driver awareness, and prevent shifting the problems from one street to another. maintain access, and also include education and enforcement efforts. this is a brief history of the traffic calming program. the program has been up and running for a little over 10 years. we agree this is a great time to take a look of the program and

make sure it is meeting our needs as efficiently as possible. we have up to threthe tracks. local streets, arterial streets, and school streets. the number one goal is safer streets for everyone, and ultimately we want to make the streets more conducive to bicycling and wafflilking. i will focus on the local streets track. we've received over 500 applications. i think this demonstrates strongly the demand throughout the city prior to the program. before funding was even available for meaningful work, we are ready had 135 except and applications. right away we have high demand for our work. -- we already have 135 applications. the reason why the number is a range of 5-8 is we have those

that work on projects that shift according to demand at the time. this is to give you an idea of how the staffing is. we split up into three teams. we have staff allocated whether it is a traffic calming, pedestrians, or bicycle traffic. there is an application process, and we analyze the request to determine if it meets the warrants for traffic calming. our goal is to address the worst, most severe problems first. that is the living document and the ships according to incoming requests. i am not board to go through every box, but this is giving you an idea of what the process looks like. i think the process has a good foundation and is very thorough.

traffic calming evoke strong emotions from people so we want to make sure the process is as thorough as possible. this is in the five-year prioritization plan documents, too. this is once we initiate a traffic calming study. these are the various steps along the way. meeting with the community, a technical analysis, and other cities prior to construction. timeline for developing local and area-wide plans. much of the time is spent waiting. you submit an application. if your area is not the worst in the city, we have to deal with the most severe problems first. it may take awhile for your problem to rise to the top. many times it may take years before your project its in the queue. queue. once that happens, it takes