from work. often they are delayed because of ridiculous traffic levels on van ness ave. not only that come up with the advent of brt, you will be revitalizing the corridor. if you walk up the corridor, it is lonely out there. it is pretty downtrodden. this really brings new hope and it will breathe new life on to the corridor. and you guys would also be reaffirming transit first, which is part of the city charter. to many times, we have been planning for the automobile, and not so much for transit. this would be a step in the right direction. and that's it. thank you. commissioner campos: thank you. commissioner wiener, do you have a question? commissioner wiener: no. commissioner campos: next

speaker, please. my name is brad thomas. i want to applaud you guys on the high level of coordination. this is an excellent compromise and i think it represents the citizens of the city " well, particularly transit riders in general. one thing, there are currently 85,000, roughly 85,000 automobile trips per day on van ness ave. i think it is important to point out on the center lane brt that needs to be a separation between us and automobile, and actual -- an actual separation of some sort.

these folks are not going to understand, then to wait finding. what i am recommending is that there be some sort of simple separation to really, truly separate the brt lanes. if those folks end up inside of those lanes, it's really goi ng to slow down those brt buses. thank you. commissioner campos: thank you. is there any other member of the public would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner wiener. commissioner wiener: thank you. in an enthusiastic supporter of

this project. i really want to compliment staff for the really elegant solution. there is this a never ending debate. i think everyone probably agreed this defeats a lot of the purpose. i know there are operational concerns at the mta, and i know stop payment -- staff came up with a good solution. this projectthis project is an f what is critical to the future of transportation in the city. we know we have a growing area.

if we did not start beefing up the class that -- transit class, we will have a big problem. the artbrt is a critical situat. i was taking this inbound and was literalthere was a truck pao close to occur. the whole line shut down because of one truck that was conflicted with a train. that is exactly why we need to move towards physical separation between the transit system and audit system whenever possible. this is a terrific project and solution, and i strongly support it. supervisor campos: thank you. supervisor farrell. supervisor farrell: i want to

thanks folks for coming out, and i was the one who continue the item, and i want to think stop for coming out and spend a lot of time with me. there are concerned i will continue to address with labor groups, of pacific heights residents' association last week. we will continue to do so with individuals, and make sure the mitigation efforts that will come forward really come to light in the next few years as the project goes forward will be very important for the neighborhood. it is something i will be focused on for district, too. i think this is the right thing to move it forward, and i will support it. commissioner olague: i really think will to stop for coming up to thiankful to staffr

coming up to this. i want to take you for your efforts. and for those coming out to show their support for it. i fully support it also. commissioner chu:iu: thank you. i want to thank all of the difference stakeholders in moving to what has been described, and i agree, what is an elegant solution. i travel on this almost every day of the week, and we know the experience right now on the streets are ones of congestion during rush hour and certainly traffic and transit situation that leaves a lot to be desired, so i appreciate that. division is really moving forward -- the viiosion is realy moving forward, and i hope this gets done on time and on budget. one thing i would like to ask is

traffic projections that are related to the project. this is the discussion that some of the stock has been engaged in. it is anticipated there will be leased 20,002 trips per day going to the corner of van ness and geary. an issue we will deal with is whether the proposed mitigation that have been provided are enough, and frankly, there are two very different pictures of what could happen with the project when its online. one perspective is the trips will not amount to any additional congestion. there is a democrdifferent perspective that can lead to gridlock. wondering if you have any thoughts or comments on that. >> thank you for the very thoughtful comment and question. first of all, we have had some involvement cpmc proposal or

initiative rather. i think it is terrific it falls of a location where both of the brt project will insi intersect. obviously the importance was look at. the van ness corridor has a concentration of senior housing that is happening every day, so this is really an ideal way to gauge -- location to talk about introducing high-quality transit. as the discussions continue, i

am sure we will be available to provide for their clarity on what could be done in addition to what was already discussed as far as dealing with mitigation. i think that both, the persons of the project there have made it significantly easier for the impacts to be mitigated. this is a key component of the discussions, and we will stay involved and to make sure we can provide as much positive as we can to make sure both projects are successful in locating in the area. supervisor chiu: thank you. one last comment request i would like to make is if there is someone on your staff that has been focused on this, if you could see -- send information to

my office about what your projected traffic impacts are and to what degree the medications that have been offered address that, because i think we are provided with very different pictures of what could happen. i have a feeling the truth is somewhere in between, but the reality is we do not know whether we will see smooth- sailing traffic through those intersections or complete and utter gridlock. it is my perspective we should think right now about how we planned for traffic that could be more extreme than what cpmc is projecting, and i would really love to get your id independent perspective on this as we wrestle with this the next couple of weeks. >> i will pass this along to planning so they can respond to you in detail, but i think what you are calling for is precisely the essence of planning. making sure we plan for the

moment when the congestion happens. we have several items on the agenda today at the same nature. the idea is to catch it when we can still do something about it, so when the problem materializes, we are ready. the federal parliament is recognizing that by putting a significant amount of money up front into making the project happen. we will be in touch with your office. commissioner chiu: i just want to move forward as quickly as we can, regardless of what we end up seeing with the project. >> think you. if you can make sure you share that information on the project with the entire commission and any member of the public you also request a copy of that. commissioner mar: i want to say i am supportive of the centrally and alternative as proposed by the plans and programs committee.

i also want to say i think this is a critical project for the city, given division for 2035 in the transit priority network. a lot of work has been done on that. i think on a global level we have seen the success is a es of brt's in other cities as well. i am looking at others going on, but it did have a question about the right-side boarding. predictably the center lane preventive. i am wondering the thinking about will there be new vehicles, and why is this proposed on van ness, which i know is more narrow. could someone to answer that question? -- could someone just answer that question? >> michael, our lead person on the committee. to go think you.

michael schwartz, the planner with the authority and project manager for environmental review. -- >> thank you. van ness is a different corridor, and we have two different types of propulsion with the buses. one is the sole hybrid in the future. 49 is an electrical vehicle. this would require two different sets of maintenance and challenges for procurement. there is a five-door motor coach in existence, but not a five- door elector coacric trolley con h in existence.

there will be new vehicles scheduled. these vehicles the to be replaced, and that will add some of the branding and features that will distinguish the service. these vehicles are said to be replaced. we will leverage some of the funds as part of the project. >> one other thing that a think is important to keep in mind is, brt is not a rail system. it is a lain for expediting travel and congestion does not affect the buses. i think the other thing it does, which is really a fundamental benefits of having this kind of a system in the center is it allows for future changes in routings by the mta. 20 years from now the mobility needs for the population may be very different. the shape of the bus routes may

be very different. we should take it vantage whether it is geary or van ness, the lanes may be different and go to different places. to force the entire fleet to have doors on both sides would probably not be the best solution. this gives it the most flexibility. it also gives us the opportunity to offer the benefits the best solution. to it regional providers like golden bay transit without forcing them to buy new equipment. i think it is really the best solution we can come up with. >commissioner campos: any other comments or questions? to it regionalthe house this change, e could dhas changed, so if we coo

a roll call vote. >> [calling roll] item passes. commissioner campos: item passes. if you could call item 9, please. >> item 9, allocate 12,000,003 and a 46,880 and 8346, 818 in p. >> at those of you that serve on the plans and programs committee know, this was referred in may without recommendation to the full board, and we took the month of sharon to come to your office to speak to you about the

study in relationship to the broader pricing initiative. this study is a follow-up to the mobility and pricing study that the authority board approved in 2010, which establish the technical feasibility of a pricing program for san francisco, which would envision approximately $3 time charge for murderers traveling to or from greater which downtown. at the time of the conclusion of the study there was significant interest from the board. this would have comparable benefits and system performance to the pricing program. fortunately, we have very strong governments that have stepped up with more than half a million dollars to support the next phase of work. the subject request for you this

morning is to provide the 10% local match to the study from the prop k parking management category. we of spoken with many of you or your staff about your project this month, and given the hour this afternoon, i will leave my presentation there and would be happy to answer any questions. s commissioner campos: colleagues, any questions? supervisor farrell: supporting this does not urge it really mean any support for pricing, but making sure we have all of the information we need to make an accurate decision. we elected to get this additional study on board to provide more information, and even this world will not result in any election in terms of alternative pricing. >> i would have to come back to the authority for alternative

action? supervisor campos: why don't we open this up for public comment? seeing onenone, public comment s closed. some house, same call. >ame house, same call. >> item #9 allocate 12, 346, 818 in prop k funds, with conditions, for nine and will request, attached is the year cashflow distribution schedules. commissioner campos: same

house, same call. >> item #9, update on the 40 projects in districts 4 and 8 with information about the projects. commissioner campos: this is an update on the districts affected, four and eight, with information about the projects. so we will turn it over to staff. >> given the time, i will go through the presentation slides quickly. those with the projects by district and the specific projects in the traffic coming areas are in the web site and are included in the past. -- packet. house,the first two things are authority-led studies. i will do a brief overview of them. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i will talk quickly about the study in district 4. the first one is the 19th ave.

investment study where we are exploring moving the end line to the west side of 19th avenue. that is for park use in transportation plans. the second study i want to talk about is the short-term approval of 19th avenue transit. for that project, seeking approval of the agency that has jurisdiction over 19th avenue, the department of california transportation, and approval to move ahead with that that is being coordinated with sfmta transit effectiveness project. i will turn control of the presentation back to ben. >> i am going to touch on 83 projects. -- touch on 3 projects.

the first one is the 19th avenue median idle planting project. this is planting in the median on 19th avenue between lincoln way. the construction project has been awarded, and the project is expected to be completed in february of 2013. i also want to touch on the sunset boulevard pedestrian safety and education project. this is to upgrade six intersections with accessible pedestrian signals along sunset boulevard and includes pedestrian our region education component. this is funded by prop. k. commissioner campos: commissioner chu, did you have a

question? commissioner chu: i can wait until after the project. >> this project experienced delays in the design phase and issues in terms of getting the construction obligation approved. we were able to work with mta staff to shift the construction project from fiscal year 2012 to fiscal year 2013, which removes the funding obligations barrier. we still have to wait for a few administrative actions for that to be official, but we're moving forward in a good direction. i want to highlight that although we did have the funds shifted or working to have been shifted, the project schedule is still on track for awarding the construction contract in november, beginning construction in march, and completing construction next august.

in district 4, i wanted to highlight new traffic signal light was installed and completed in january of 2012. with that, i can take questions on district 4. >>commissioner chu: with regardo the studies and plans, i have been less than impressed with our department prioritization a different planning studies in different parts of the neighborhood. definitely want to continue to work with you folks on try to make sure we are looking expansively. when you talk about on slight read it 19th avenue and thus must study and realignments, i want to be very clear that is not actually in district four at all, although it is close. instead, some of the areas i would like to seek the authority

to lead have to do with the south end of ocean beach. a lot of talk about what we will do around the erosion issues and how we potentially route traffic in the area to deal with the erosion that we expect to be in the long-term. those are areas i would like to be in focus. we have spoke to entities about studies and plans around major corridors off. we get a lot of attention from some of the central city corridor traffic areas, but we do not get much attention on the outer avenues in terms of central corridor. talking about lincoln and the great highway. i would like to see attention in the district with regards to studies and plans. think you. ank you. >> moving on to district 8, the better market street study. there is an upcoming out reach meeting in the month of july. the first meeting is on july 17

from 6:00-8:30 at the mta offices. the second meeting will be on july 21 from 10:00-12:30, also at the mta offices. finally, the study team will do a web and are on july 19 from 12:00-1:00. any more information can be found at better market street. the central freeway activity oaa will come to the committee in june and the board in july for approval. just want to highlight a few of the bike projects in district 8, specifically by improvements to improve the left-hand turn from market street on to valencia funded by the transportation clean air program. that project is moving forward to completion in november of

this year. i want to highlight the street transit and pedestrian and repair projects. this is at the border of district 8, but we did want to improve -- included. this is in the conceptual engineering stage. there was delay in getting the project started, mostly due to cost increases. we were able to take some of the second st. funds. we reprogram them to this, but judd. it includes making haight street to weigh between laguna and market street. -- two-way between the good of market street. the project is in conceptual engineering stage.

we will bring the updates on the district by presentation for this project. >>the final project i wanted to highlight is one i am sure is very near and dear to the district. it is the church project. it is in construction and corrugated with another project that is called a pedestrian and improvement project, so it is a really good example of this project moving forward. it is currently in construction. with that, i would remind the board members we removed five and seven presentation to september at this point, so we will come back in september with the five and seven presentation. we are already developing those lists. i will be developing the list and meeting with supervisors about them over the next few

months. commissioner weiner: thank you. one thing that was not touched on, the replacement of some of the escalators, which i know is a huge source of frustration for all over the system, the failing escalators that had caused huge problems for a lot of people, and i was thrilled with the brand new church station escalator reopened in the north side of market. i never thought i would say an escalator was beautiful, but it was beautiful, clean, new and it works. it gave me confidence in the systemwide changes that will happen. >> why don't we open this up to public comment. this is an opportunity for the public to comment on the projects that we're