wonder if there is a next natural check in to talk about this? >> we have a last full ta meeting, we had a presentation but it was cut short by bumping into our meeting. wiener has had a discussion on market street. >> i called a hearing but want to make sure the hearing is meaningful so it's not a repeat. so probably more like in may or late april or may we do that just to make sure that there is some progress that's been made. >> commissioner chiu. >> let me sit down and get a briefing of where that conversation led up in part because the finance committee has been asking for the last two years to make additional

incremental expenditures for a variety of many consultants that we have on this project and there has been a sense of not seeing the progress we have wanted to see specifically around some of these near term projects. i'm okay with moving out this item today but would very much like perhaps in an about three weeks to get a summary of those conversations with those stake holders and understanding of why certain things were included and why certain things weren't which may require another conversation depending on that final list but certainly look forward to further conversations about that and plan to sit with wiener to talk about the next steps on this program. >> okay. thank you, commissioner chiu. commissioner campos? >> thank you mr. chair and mr. newark for your presentation. what i have is to make sure

whatever happens is that there is as much community input what we do on market and mission street on some ideas that have been put around for mission street. i feel unfortunately they have not included enough input from the residents and folks who will be impacted by what's being proposed. so i look to being part of this discussion. it's not just relevant on what happens on mission street on this part of down and district 6 area but it also impacts what happens with district 9, 11, other districts. i do have a question, though, there has been talks in the past about having rapid transit on mission street and i'm wondering how that fits into what is being proposed, being talked about for market street and mission street here?

>> i think i would ask the mta to respond to that. >> andrew lee, transit planner. right now the mission street is not one of or corridor but it will affect the streets as well as the outside better market street study area and we are coordinating our efforts to tell the public exactly what will happen because if the mission street concept for better market street goes in, it will preclude the improvements. >> okay. i don't think we should not consider it down the road.

i think going down this path could conclude that if we decided that was an option. thank you. >> okay. thank you very much. we can open this item up for comment. any public wish to come forward? >> commissioners, i'm the market street design advisory review committee. i think that this is something like the difference between tactics and strategy. the tactics here are the near term and short-term five year which is absolutely essential. they show that something is happening and i improve market street for the city. i ask you not to forget the strategy that sometimes is

lost in the federal government and that is in the 2040 concept. dpw and the planning department do have to get together along with mta and consider what's going to happen on market street in the long-term. in the strategy situation aiming for 2040. so as much as what we do now is absolutely necessary, it helps the city, it helps the citizens and helps the economy along market street. we have to keep the 2040 or further in mind all along. so that type of planning and funds and personnel for that planning has to be kept in mind. thank you. thank you, commissioner miguel? >> next speaker please. >> good morning, commissioners,

my name is tom for the coalition. greater part to all of us by coalition. i just want to clarify that we have not yet received feedback from the city on our ideas for near term and pilot i am improvements, although we do expect that we'll be hearing from that project team shortly. so we will definitely keep you in touch in terms of our thoughts and reflexes -- reflections on those ideas and keep you informed. thank you. >> thank you very much, any other public member would like to comment? seeing none, we'll close for comment. you'll can >> can we take this item? >> one of our colleagues had requested a summary of all of the different expenditures for all the different consultants

on this project. could i ask where that summary is? i haven't seen it come across my desk. >> so we did bring a summary of all the work that all the consultants have been do you think and i also believe -- >> do you have a document that you could give to us? >> the blue >> got it. thank you. >> that table has all the descriptions and various task as what the deliverables are and we are about 85 percent complete with the consultant work. >> do you ever breakout by the consultant themselves. i know there were a dozen consultants

that you were working on this. >> we can get that to you. >> if i understand things correctly, i think we understood in committee that what you were asking for was an in in the total budget and subsequent to that it's actually shifting money around in the budget? >> yes. we are shifting money to provide more money #20 so they can finish that project. >> if you can get that to me, that would be helpful. >> thank you. >> okay. we may have a new house. we'll do roll call. >> commissioner avalos, breed, campos, chiu, cohen, ferrel, kim, absent, tang, wiener, yee,

item passes. >> next item, please. >> item no. 7, authorize the executive director for construction services in the right of way certification for the cal department of transportation the united states code license agreement and all the circumstances related documents for federal and safe funds for the improvements project. >> public comments? now open on this item. seeing none, we'll close for public comment. colleagues can take the house. item passes. >> next item, please. >> the county transportation item. >> from the programs committee. commissioner yee? >> thank you. unfortunately i missed the last meeting otherwise i would have

this question then. i noticed that there is a candle stikck cost for $90 million in terms of the timeframe they are considering that things in that area would change drastically. i notice the timeframe for this is 2020, but i question whether or not 2020 we would have enough information to actually start planning what to do with those exit orders. i need more information in terms of whether or not these things are being considered in terms of not having a candlestick there. >> okay. mta staff? >> good morning. deputy for

planning and on behalf of the project manager who is ill. let me answer that question. it's listed as a 2020 project and this relates to the bay view water front project which is happening in the 2020 timeframe. our analysis shows to prior to that point it's not absolutely critical to have that change rebuilt. it does take a long time to get those projects under way and an approved and funded and it's work now between now and 2020. >> i guess i was going on the opposite end whether some of the build out would be slower? >> that could well be. we've seen it happen with mission bay and commission cycles. going forward it's hard to say. that would be the earliest in our

opinion, although we know that some folks on the other line are akin to have that built. the interest changes are important for the bay land. 2020 might be the earliest and possibly even later as you suggest. >> thank you. >> okay. if there are no other comments or questions, we can go public comment. >> excuse me, chair. may i indicate the letter on your desk is with a recommendation but the staff was coordinated with the staff to address the impact. their letter does suggest that they agree the project list is reasonable and the technical background for the cost participation framework is reasonable and they wish to still be involved

in on going discussions regarding the potential cost framework methodology which we agree is an on going even after the study. >> thank you. any public member would like to comment, come forward. seeing none, we close for comment. the item passes. >> next item, please. >> work conditions to the department of public works. appropriate $200,000 for funds request and san francisco state university for one request and -- schedules and the prop k pedestrian participation program. this is an action item. >> thank you, comments or questions? let's go to public comments? commissioner yee? >> i have a question on one of

the allocations, the 146,000 for san francisco state university to basically come up with a plan to improve the pedestrian walkway and so forth. the question here is because this is a project of san francisco state that's building a wellness center and they need to -- they realize there is going to be more traffic caused by that. so maybe it's a clarification here where a lot of times i keep on hearing when san francisco state has projects, we have no jurisdiction over it, and now, they are building a building that would impact the street and i'm wondering, this is just the planning phase of it, but in terms of the implementation

of it, they build on and so forth who is paying for that? is it assumed that city will be paying for this when a lot of times when they have their projects, we have no control over it. so, clarification? >> can we direct that question to ta staff? the question is on for future build out, who would cover the cost of that? >> absolutely. the funding plans for the overall project has about $1.1 million in prop fees in part of the strategic plan in $140,000 in sfu funds. the total cost is under $2 million. >> so it's partially paid by whatever grants they get. i

guess. >> thank you, this item is up for public comments. seeing none, we'll close for public comment. can we take the same house call? item passes. >> next item, please. >> prop case strategic plan update and schedule, this is an action item. >> comments or questions from colleagues? public comment? we'll close public comment. colleagues, same house, same call? item passes. >> next item, please. >> no items. this is an information item. >> any new items to introduce? okay. public comment? we'll close all public comment. and our next item? >> item 12, public comment. >> i'm holding my breath for

general public comment. we'll close public comment. >> and our next item? >> adjournment. >> we are adjourned. thank you. >> >>