checks. so you do get something. any committee that deals with the fiscal distributions says something especially when he forwards it to the full board, which is this because you sit here as the full board and sit here as commissioners to the san francisco county transportation authority. let us take it serious. often time, i see millions of dollars, no deliberations whatsoever. let it go forward. that nonsense should stop. that is utter disregard for the constituents. you are representing. you have to say something. if it's millions of dollars, $15 million. $5 million. $10 million, you just can't sit there and not say a word. okay the san francisco county transportation, the san francisco county transportation

authority and the so-called experts. they don't even represent the diversity of san francisco. they don't represent the diversity of san francisco. how are we choosing this so-called experts? on lifestyle, something else? if you speak the truth, you say, that's not politically correct. what is politically correct? is transparency politically correct? is accountability politically correct? when a high-level mta official talks to me and says she doesn't trust or he doesn't trust the san francisco transportation authority, and the deliberation and if we say what we have to say, after we have the documents is that politically correct?

come on, man. y'all have a conscious. use it. thank you very much. >> thank you, is there any other member of the public that would like to speak. please come forward. >> san francisco supervisors, transportation authority. congrats, you're doing a great job of sacking the job all in the quality of life in san francisco. it's a perfect time right now to get away with absolutely anything in city hall. you've got the sunshine ordinance, quietly paid off and snoozing. not even paying attention. why, you could put al-qaeda out here on the transportation authority and you could probably

get away with it. because you've got the whole system rapped up. eth ethics commission, brown act. whichever way you want to go, san franciscans, we're ramming this down your throat. why? it's not about democracy, it's about communism. we tell you as a dictatorship what we think is best for you regardless of what the people voted for. regardless of what is good for the city and its citizens. and if you as supervisors and members of public sit back and allow this type of absolute tyranny shows you have no

backbone or discretion and you'ra complete moron. >> thank you. >> is there anybody member of the public that would like to speak seeing none? public comment is closed. my suggestion would be make for each item that you explain exactly what the recommendation from the committee was, whether approval, non-approval or no recommendation and then the last point they will make is i appreciate the comments and the thoughts from me, this is a little different from the item that the board of supervisors considered. the delegation of authority in this case is expressly limited to the receipt of funds to the extent there's any expenditure of funds, authority this board will have the final say on that. but i appreciate the point. i know that the house has

changed. if we could have roll call. roll call taken. >> that item passes. >> thank you, please call item six. >> allocate $15,000,581 in prop k funds for one request and $4,485,000 for public works subject to the attached schedules and amend the street resurfacing, rehabilitation and maintenance programs. this is an action item. >> this item came from the plants committee. any member of the public that would like to speak on item six,

please come forward. seeing none, public comment closed. colleagues any comments or questions? can we take this same house, same call. item pass says. item seven. >> update on authority projects in district six and city-wide. >> now we will turn over to our chief deputy. >> thank you. good morning commissioners, i'm feeling old age approaching here. i need two kinds of glasses. if you will bear with me. we are presenting on the last district, district six. there's a tremendous amount of city-wide projects. we will discuss this month and transit projects next month. hard copies are available for the public and those watching. all materials are on our website. we are in the process of

finalizing a beta version of an interactive map that will allow you to pull up the active projects in your district by type, distance, next to a certain address. you will really like it and go towards making this information accessible to you and the public. i will remind you, hard copies on your desk that are divided in for district six, prop k and projects funded by other authorities the administrator of the prop a vehicle registration fee. and active projects are currently under way and completed. i will start with district six. we have a lot of staff here to answer questions. district six poses a special challenge because of intensity of the land. it has a lot of district and

city-wide projects. you will notice central subway and transbay transit center aren't or here because we have city-wide projects. >> i will start with authority-led projects. i won't go into details on the yerba buena. this is retrofitting the ramps to treasure island. right now the project is in the final design and right-of-way certification phase. the schedule will depend on when the navy transfers the land to the city. the schedule is to award the construction project for the ramp in late 2013.

market street. i will give a brief update on the study. good morning. tilly chang. this is actually a d.p.w.-led project. this is in our 2008 report. this is a multi-agency team. as recommended by the various studies, we have been undertaking a support role to focus on the resurfacing authority and adding pedestrian safety and a bicycle facility potentially to that design. public workshops did happen in june and july of this year. the dpw have continued to outreach to the market street. the project is on hold pending land use studies. the mayor's office is involved and there has been a new person

has been hiring at the planning department to lead that work for the planning department. the project manager is to help answer questions as needed. >> great. >> the next item, which i will quickly run through. van ness. >> i would like to ask questions where this comes between district six and truly a project for the future of our city. when i received the presentation on today, i looked into the history of where we have been. we approved funding in 2010. i sponsored a resolution in the middle of last year urging the m.t.a. to move forward near term for this. it's been over two years and at this point, doesn't seem as we're any closer to getting anything implemented. i know there's a presentation in

front of the finance committee. i expressed frustration and a number of us had frustration in not seeing different options. when we looked at the minutes, we were told while the project was six months delayed, as long as we gave you six months funding, we were told that we would be meeting schedule. now i hear that it seems like we're as far as ever from getting this moving. could you give us a sense as to where the project has been delayed and what do we need to get it going? >> let me turn it over to chris. >> good morning. supervisors. project manager, department of public works. those are excellent questions of course. as you can imagine, and understand, market street is a very complex street and one of most important, if not the most important street in san francisco. as we move into this project and

continue to study the options, talk to the public about what folks need to see on this information of that complexity continues. we in coordination with the mayor's office. we recognize the importance of looking at those two efforts simultaneously and taking a moment to see how we can integrate those projects. it's in by no means on hold. but taken a pause on the city side to evaluate are we meeting the needs of the city and the multiple agencies invested in this project and not having the team move forward until we know exactly how to meet those needs. so really the city team is taking time to think about the feedback that we received from

the public, the interest of the multiple agencies and the needs of the corridor to make sure that as we go forward in those studies, we're sure of what we're doing. so that's really the reason for this slow down. yes, we are not on the schedule that we had committed to earlier this year, but we think time spent now will result in savings later. so we're thinking about how to develop a meaningful pilot program and implement it here in san francisco, which has its challenges. we think that's the right way to go and looking at the specifics of that. we're looking to complete this phase of work next year by summertime so that we can move into those pilot programs and move into environmental. we're also looking at alternative project delivery methods and the potential if that on market street to make up the schedule on the other side. in other words, in design and construction phases. so how can we keep the project

moving, get the most meaning project and meet the time lines. those are the things we're investigating right now. >> so from my perspective, we have had a number of meetings on this topic. every six months, we hear the same excuses. i'm not going to suggest it's your fault or who is in charge getting all these agencies to figure out where we're going? >> this is my role. i have been working to do just that. it is simply as i said, it's very complicated and we're trying to make things work in a very tight time frame. if you were to step back and look at it over again, we would have put forward a schedule that was longer than the one we did. we have been trying to balance really moving the project forward on an aggressive time line with resurfacing with the

right length of time for this project. >> could you provide to us and you may not have it today, but could you provide to us what the total cost on the project have been. how much you spent on consultants and how much you anticipate it to be. >> absolutely. i don't have that today. >> do you have a plan on environmental review and how much that will cost? >> again if we implement a pilot program, that may shift from the current cost. i don't have the number with me, but can get you that as well. >> again, it's my understanding because there have been two transit agencies, dpw as well as planning department, the land use issues and the transit issues are have been difficult to resolve. who will be making those decisions?

>> the land use issues are at a different level than i am. i expect that officer of economic and work force development and the mayor's office and planning will have a lot to say about those and how that coordinates. transit will be with our two transit agencies. >> let me just, i guess end by saying, given my how many issues come up. i don't have very much faith this project is going to see any real progress in the near term future. i would love to be kept abreast as we move forward. it makes sense to do another status report. part of reason i introduced a resolution in september of last year is these issues had cropped up. we knew they were interdepartmental problems and coordinating. we agreed with this board of supervisors supported by the mayor to really urge the sfmta and other departmentsa agencies

to figure out what our options are. speeding up transit on market street. improving the walking and biking experience along market and figuring out a way to do this to enhance the commercial and cultural aspects of market street. it's been two plus years. so, again, this is ground hog day. i don't know what more we can say except it's been d disappointi disappointing. i am very much interested in how much money has been spent. at the next meeting we have, i would ask department heads to be a part of this conversation. i have a feeling, there's real issues that are not being worked out our at the mayoral level to see what the vision of market street is and a time frame

that's not going to cause us to burn millions of dollars to figure this out. >> commissioner wiener. >> thank you, there chairman. i want to associate myself with commissioner david chu's remarks. more than one person has described you as one of best project managers in the city. this is an issue of in terms of the agencies involved, sometimes too many cooks in the kitchen. unfortunately, i have seen this come into play with some of the smallest pedestrian safety projects where it's this completely disorganized thing. different departments come in

and veto the project. if you don't even have a small project, the member of the board of supervisors who is willing to push a project forward, these projects are just, it's almost like the system is set up to kill pedestrian safety projects. and so it's incredibly frustrati frustrating, there seems to be this inability for agencies to work together in a coordinated fashion and just move forward and make decisions together and move forward with the project. and that goes well beyond the better market street's plan. it's a dysfunction in our city in san francisco. it's continually frustrating to those what believe in improving our streets and pedestrian safety and having streets makes it very challenging to move these forward. the better market street is the largest manifestation of that.

so i would love to find a way to empower you and the department of political works as the lead agency to be able to move forward with this. right now, it seems there are just, again, too many cooks in the kitchen. it's a major frustration for me for a lot of these different projects. i think our present issue is correct. thank you. >> commissioner kim. >> thank you. i understand the concerns. i think we saw it with second street and i'm very happy on how second street is moving forward and christina has been very diligent to make that happen. we have seen this happen before. my understanding with better market street and i don't know if i missed it in your presentation. planning has hired a mid- market planner.

that individual has only started this week. they also asked dpw to delay some of its work so that it could help coordinate some of the land use/pedestrian safety and transit in that correct? is that correct? >> it wasn't a request, but this project manager is coming on to do this large chunk of work. it makes sense to slow down some to figure out how to integrate. >> i highly recommend you sit down with vice chair wiener's office for the larger vision of market street. i want to coordinate everyone's effort. there's so much activity on market and differences than have

previously been planned. we are seeing greater usage on this area where people focus their energy on we're seeing a lot of activity between sixth and van ness and trying to figure out how to have a balance. that balances the rivitalization and the stabilization in that community. the one concern is that we have put forward a lot of grants forward for consulting and outreach to ensure those dollars weren't idling away or being spent unnecessarily as they were pauses in the projects. if you could just respond to that question. >> sure. one of the reasons that we have had the pauses that we've had on the project is in being mindful of the budget. we have a large technical team

on the consultant's side and the city team. when the city team isn't clear, we use up the budget and the product at the end of the day may not be what we need. that's in part why we've had these pauses. we're fairly close to the end of phase one. we put forward the options of the corridor and the next piece is to put them in to concept. in terms of planning, i'm sorry, i think that was your question. >> did you want to speak to the land use issues? >> thank you. so, the project manager at planning did begin work just this week, and we have had an initial discussion about the need to get together and frame or develop how these two efforts are going to go forward simultaneously. that was created in order to develop kind of missing piece

when redevelopment went away. we really need to look at land use in midmarket. there have been other developments with the office of work force development to talk about public-private partnership. we know the efforts will continue to grow. as you said, the area from sixth to van ness is changing at a rapid face. it's all important to the work we're doing going forward. >> i think at some point, if would be helpful in the update to really understand what the linkage is between planning and dpw and mta. i could also see how we could move forward with better market street without having a clear understanding of what planning has in mind in terms of land use. it could be that way. i think it's important to show

the linkage so we know why we're trying to coordinate this. >> if i could add, you mentioned the grant commitments. we are mindful of the dates those grants will expire and we will ensure we will meet those. >> commissioner chu. >> i want to build on one thing that supervisor wiener said. i agree, your work to be excellent and i cannot imagine how frustrating this experience must be for staff trying to coral different bureaucracies. it seems as if there's four bureaucracies. dpw, planning, mta and ota. who is arbitrating, given you

report to the head of dpw. my guess you can't tell four or five department heads what everyone is going to do. who is ultimately making those decisions? i am more than happy if it takes a convening of members of the board of supervisors or department heads to figure this out. i would love if the bureaucracies could figure this out. >> the structure is we have a director's policy group. they convene once a month and discuss the issues around market street. one of the things that we're finding is that it's difficult to get everyone in the same room once a month. but we might need more discussion because of complexity. it's a little difficult to make the work. we're looking at that right now.

ways to make that more functional. and with, i should mention, we have been convening special meetings with the directors over the last few months, including a partnering style workshop where we have been tackling these issues interdepartmentally to move market street forward quickly. so we are addressing this right now internally. i think we're making good progress and we're carving out that time to do just that. >> i think you've heard loudly and clearly from the board our perspective on that. i think if our involvement or questions could be helpful moving that process along, let us know what we can do. but at least with regards to the questions i have asked. i would like to get information on budget, cost control, schedule controls and next steps. please communicate to all departments i think the time frame and the fact that we have

been waiting now for two plus years and an awful lot of money. i think our patience is wearing a little bit. >> colleagues, i want to give a couple reports, i want to bring this back. my hope is probably early next year to give them time to probably to get a more realistic time frame. i think it's difficult to coordinate all of these agencies. something i have talked to staff about is having a larger discussion with the coordination among the various agencies how

is that coordination taking place? we will be noticing that item for a future meeting so we can have a presentation and the presentation and that discussion really should involve the department heads. so with that, why don't we continue with the rest of presentation and again, thank you for your good work. >> that's the reason why we're not doing detailed presentations. they are just too complex. the next two slides are the two signature projects, prop k, venice and geary. i won't present on these unless you have questions. the van ness, final e.i.r. is expected to be released at the end of the year. the draft i.r. is scheduled to be released in 2013. >> i