>> noon. >> 12. >> the next finance meeting? >> it is april 9th. >> the authority board meeting, at the end of the month on the 27th, i believe. >> the 26th. so we could see this item move forward with or without recommendation and have the team come back and report at the 27th at the full board or the land use and i am not sure that there is a date for that yet. >> okay. >> okay, commissioner tang. >> i would want to acknowledge the comments that the commissioners made, but i want to make a point that it is important to take this opportunity to look at mission street options as well. while we have this opportunity.

so, as long as we can address some of the issues that some of the commissioners have brought up, i do want to support that i am supportive of looking at other options. >> i do would like to echo the comments of commissioner tang. i am interested on the options on mission street. now, i don't see anyone else in the cue, maybe we can continue with the presentation? >> so, i am just going to talk a little bit about the projects and some of the reasons why we are doing these particular options. as we have discussed before, the better market street project is trying to address many things in the corridor and we need improvements for all modes of transportation, pedestrian improvements bicycle improvements transit improvements and better or reducing auto conflicts, and other vehicle improvements. so to this end, as you have

alluded, we have come up with three options, that we are moving forward and studying in great detail. so for all three of the options there are basic consistent points, one of them, they all contain bicycles... they have potential increased auto restrictions, even though we are keeping ada vehicles need to be working with taxis etc.. we are trying to do active street light stones and how do we enliven the streets and better to be around? >> and also better transition and service changes this is what is important to the folks in the neighborhoods how do we get the buses running quicker or more aoe efficiently and how do i get home at time. >> additionally they need up grades and doing landscaping and street trees and four of the vehicle lanes and do increased lighting up grades

and intersection and traffic signal improvements. first option, we are calling the market street shared lane, it is similar to the configuration that exists on market street today. however we will be improving the conditions, the intersections, the paintings, the stripings, the lighting, everything would be better and more modern, more improved. as if, you know, obviously some pros and cons to all of these, one of the cons is that it does not provide a separate bicycle facility, however it does provide a lot of space for the street lights zones and one of the things that we really need to keep in mind is how do we make market street more active? how do we give folks something to do while they are standing and waiting for the buses? >> the second option we are calling the market street bike way. and this particular option we would have a cycle track, a divided track and the design is

still to be decided. and we would have buses, and everything back and forth. part of the cons to this is that even though there is a cycle track, there is no continuous bicycle facility. when we get to some of the pinch points at the bike portals and some of the larger islands we will need to vere off into a shared lane of traffic. it also limits the size of the street light zones and we would need to move back the curbs, and make lessen some of the work and it would also involve a lot more money in terms of a lot more permanent changes to the street. but there is definitely pros to this as well. having the bicyclists separate, would make it easier if you are on the one of the challenges is

that over 250,000 people, use market street every day. on top of that, over a third of the muni lines are on market street. it is hard to do something when you have so much going on. and the idea is to figure out, how do we make it best for all modes of traffic, not just, you know, better for some and not so great for others? and so in order to be looking at that, we started thinking about mission street. and that is why we are here today, because we thought that it was within, that we needed to at least address what would it be like if we looked at mission street as part of the over all project? what about mission street? how are you combining the different streets?

the city. it currently has the buses on mission street are too large for the lanes and are constantly cutting in front of the traffic. they are also very perpendicular streets and it is flat and etc.. and so when we started looking at the existing conditions, we figured maybe we should do another option. and we are calling that option the market street transit corridor and mission street bike way and as you have heard, what this would involve, is moving the 14 and the 14 l buses from mission, on to market so that market becomes the transportation corridor for the city. and on mission street, we would put a dedicated cycle lane, a dedicated cycle track there. we could have it similar to

where we can time the lights we are not able to do that on market, but on mission they are perpendicular and you can time it for cyclists. another part of this is that we can allow the left turn lanes for cars. i don't know about you but i have been struck on mission street in a car and not able to get off because you can never go left. this you may be allowing, that and it would also allow more for the bicyclists and cars to be able to go to the market and the northern area of downtown. i want to reiterate that the better market street is more than just transportation and it is also about street lights and

all about enlifening the space and leaving unique identity to the plaza and to the market street. this is the current time line. as i mentioned earlier, we are not ignoring what needs to be done today. we are doing very clear from you as well as from the public that there needs to be immediate changes, but we are also looking to what we can do to the investing in the future. and all three options are now on the table. in july, we will be holding public workshops where these concepts will be easier to understand and where it will be a design of what a bike cycle track would like like and what a street scape would be and so we encourage you to be involved in that. and we are also continuing to do out reach, and we bicycled with the bike coalition last week, went down mission, down market. and to look at the pros and

cons, of the bicycle conditions on both of those streets and i encourage you to do the same. >> today, as miss cheng mentioned, we are asking for a contract amendment for up to $395,000 for consultants to add the mission street option. the mission street would be doing both the existing conditions, research, which we did for market street but we need to do it for mission, plus additional studies and not just mission or not just market but how do you connect the two streets? how do you get the bicyclists from different parts of the city downtown most efficiently? what kinds of car restrictions can we do without impacting the hotels and the other businesses? where do people go when they get on those buses? which ones should we move and which ones should we consolidate. so, i appreciate your time and your interest in our project.

thank you. >> colleagues i was wondering if anyone has any questions. you have exhausted them. is there any members of the public that would like to comment on this? >> are you sure? >> okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. and let's see, this is there an action for this item? >> commissioner? >> as i said before i think that the action that i would feel comfortable is moving this out without recommendation and just to understand the timing of when this might get to the full ta is end of this month, is that right? >> the next ta meeting. >> march 26th. >> march 26th, and would that be enough time to receive some of the information that we have requested? >> okay. >> i am seeing, yes. >> that would be great. >> who is the project lead on this? is it dpw. >> peg design is not the project manager and not well

today. >> she is the interim project manager? >> yes. for dpw. >> i think that one of the challenges that we are aware of again because there are so many departments and consultant teams understanding who is really is driving this and being able to force decisions as something that we have all been asking questions about and i am not sure if there has been a good resolution about it and i hope that there has and something that we are all monitoring. >> right. >> thank you >> so i will make a motion to move this out without recommendation. >> is there a second? >> second by commissioner farrell? without objection? >> all right. >> so moved, madam, could you please call item five? >> recommending authorization of the executive director to execute the cooperation agreement with the construction services and the right-of-way certification with the california department of transportation and the united states coast guard license agreement associated with the

utility agreement and all other related documents for the reset of federal and state funds for the yerba buena iceland ramps improvement projects >> i am the project manager, for the project and i have a short presentation to give you to give you a history and make sure that you understand the improvements and get into a discussion on the item in front of you. >> we will go through the existing conditions and a little bit of the overview and status and schedule and staff recommendation. >> let's talk about the existing conditions, if you have been out there, you will know that they are not very good, the existing on-ramp on the left side there, is very short. and acceleration distance short and the west found off-ramp is on the left side which is not standard and so there are definitely geometric and operational deficiencies that exist. the good news is that we are going to reconstruct both the westbound on and off-ramp, the westbound off-ramp is colored in blue and it will be on the right side and is standard and

will be standard lengths and the on-ramp is colored in orange there and it will be an loop on-ramp and you will have better acceleration distance before the tunnel in order to merge on to the highway. a couple of critical component and one is the historic properties referred to as ten and 257 and they will be relocated to the intersection of mucula road and treasure island road and one other important point is that this project is separate and independent from the san francisco bay bridge project but as you know we will tie into the bay bridge and we are coordinated and have been working for the last five years in terms of approvals. >> let's go back and revisit the approvals we received the decision in november of 2011 and this board took a certification action in december 2011. we are finalizing the plans and specs for the project and the item in front of you is to

discuss further and we are ready to execute the certifications for the construction funding phase, let's discuss the agreements quickly, the u.s. coast guard license that gives us the right to build a temporary road in which the coast guard is requiring to continue to have 24-hour access to and from the island. there are 6 different utility agreements we are executing four with the navy and one with at&t and one with comcast and refers to the specific responsibilities of the parties and confirms that we are allowed to relocate those utilities. and the next agreement is the cooperative agreement, very important, it outlines the responsibilities between the transportation authority and cal trans. the transportation authority will advertise award and administer this contract during construction, the next agree is the cal transcertification which confirms all of the necessary rights to enter and

to construct physically on the island are in place. >> good news here is that the construction phase is 100 percent funded with federal and state highway funds to the tune of $77.5 million. and also, tita under who an existing moa is reimbursing for any costs that are not covered by the federal and state funds, they have been the primary match during the phase during the prelim engineering and design and once it blew into construction and right away it turns over to the federal and state for 100 percent reimbursementbility and once again, we will administer this contract and we being the transportation authority. so, let's just look at this schedule, psand e, certification, being plan specs and estimates and right-of-way, that is the time frame right here in march where we are

seeking construction approval this month in the last week of march to meet the funding deadline and we will be back in the may time frame to execute tida memo of agreement for the right-of-way construction phases and also to provide a recommendation for construction management consultant to serve as the construction management. >> and our intent is to advertise the construction this sum ner in 2013, and will award in late 2013 and to start construction by early 2014. construction will take approximately two-plus years. so, if we are on the schedule which we will be, it will be to open new ramps to and from the island on say mid 2016. >> so, the staff recommendation is to authority the executive director to execute the cal transconstruction cooperative agreement, and the right-of-way certification and the u.s. coast guard license agreement

and all agreements with the u.s. navy and at&t and comcast and funding docs for the federal and state requirements. >> that concludes my presentation. >> great. thank you very much. >> colleagues, do you have any questions for mr. cordova? >> okay. seeing none, are there any members of the public that like to speak on this item? >> all right. seeing that there is no public comment, public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve item five? >> all right, motion lead by commissioner chiu and seconded by farrell, without objection? >> this item goes forward. and all right, madam clerk. >> 6. >> introduction of new items this is an information item. >> colleagues, is there any news? >> no news, i guess that is a good thing. >> all right. is there any members of the public that would like to speak on thit em. >> seeing none public comment is closed. >> madam clerk, could you call item seven?

>> public comment. >> public comment. public comment is closed. thank you, madam clerk. >> public comment is closed. are there any other items? >> item number 8. adjournment. >> thank you very much. this meeting is adjourned.

testing testing.

>> public comment is open. item four is public comment is open. we will close public comment. >> item five adjourn. >> thank you colleagues.

>> good afternoon. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors land use and economic development committee. my name is scott wiener. i'm the chair of the committee. to my right is supervisor jane kim, the committee vice-chair and to my left is supervisor david chiu. sfgtv staff who are recording today's meeting are jessie

larson and nona markonian. thank you to sfgtv. ms. miller, are are there any announcements? >> please make sure cell phones and electronic devices are. completed cards [speaker not understood]. items acted upon today will be on the march 19th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you. madam clerk, will you please call item number 1? >> item number 1 is an ordinance approving exceptions to requirements of the seismic safety loan program under the administrative code and the sslp program regulations, regarding a $2,379,464 loan for an existing affordable housing project at the hotel isabel located at 1091 mission street. >> thank you. and supervisor kim is the author of this legislation. >> thank you, chair wiener. this is basically -- we are asking for an exception to our seismic safety loan program -- deferred extended loan program. hotelies isabel is one of our affordable housing units here in district 6 on the south of market. currently has 72 units affordable housing and it's owned by the hotel [speaker not

understood] a limited partnership with who is general partner is todd koh who is here today and we're just ready to ask for an exemption from the loan to value ratio requirement and other underwriting criteria set forth in the san francisco administrative code for a number of reasons that i believe the mayor's office of housing can explain in more detail. so, we'd just ask for your support today on this exception . so, we'd like to bring up a staff member of the mayor's office of housing to talk about this in more detail. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is lydia ely and i'm a project manager at the mayor's office of housing. as supervisor kim mentioned, we're asking for an exemption from loan to value ratio requirements of the seismic safety loan program. when the city first loaned about a million $800,000 to

this project in 1997, the project even at that time, because of existing debt, exceeded the loan to value ratio as required by the sfsd program. so, they secured that debt with a guarantee -- with a loan guarantee on the property. last year we gave another $700,000 in loan funds from the sflp program to the building for some additional seismic work under the sidewalk which we have not been able to fund in 1997. because of the additional loan amount and because the project now has a new loan with the state, the loan to value ratio was so out of kilter that they had to secure with a loan guarantee on another building that the nonprofit owned which is mendelson house, 30 37 folsom. now the owner wants to refinance mendelson house at the new hud loan and we can't -- we can no longer secure this

loan guarantee with that property. so, we're asking to -- we need to remove the deed of trust from mendelson house and by doing so we will be out of compliance with the loan to value ratio requirements. so, that's what this request is today. : i'm happy to answer any questions about the project itself or the seismic [speaker not understood]. >> i think you need to speak a little bit to the importance of ensuring the affordability of hotel isabel and why we are asking for this exception. >> when it was created by the voters in 1991, it was aimed at market rate housing as well as affordable housing. as you no doubt no, most market rate loans have loan to value requirements that are intended to guarantee the lenders can recoup their itm