additionally cap and trade continues to be a focus in the capitol. the cap and trade second round of options was conducted in february, and generated a goes total between the stationary source and utilities of about close to a quarter of a billion dollars and more than a quarter billion of dollars. the funds generated are returned to rate payers as rebates in the bills. and the funds derived from the stationary sources are the subject to an ongoing car. we will have a duty to come back in april with a proposed investment plan. there is a bit of a disconnect, the governor had presumed a billion dollars annual from that resource from the stationary source options and it looks like we will be closer

to a half a billion in the current budget year, we are in. one city, the resources board finishes the suggested plan, it will be submitted to the governor and the governor will adopt a final program or project to be released in the may revise. so we are close to the end game on seeing what kind of projects the governor to like to see, funded from this source. so that concludes my report and i would be glad to answer questions that you may have. >> thank you. >> colleagues do you have any questions? >> i had a question about you mentioned a little bit the transportation bill, you said that you anticipated a little, i don't know how you, i can't remember how you described it, but, intense conversation, maybe. >> on the karl moyer legislation? >> yes. >> senate transportation committee, has been skeptical on last year's measure that

almost passed that was similar to this bill. there is two levels of skepticism and two levels that are funded in this measure, one is ab118 which provides funding for a range of alternative duel transportation and the other is the karl moyer program, that is not the center of the interest of the senate transportation committee chair and staff, the other section, the ab118 there are constitutional questions have arisen about the source or the use of registration fees for some of the things that the energy commission has later made allocations for. that is going to be on the going focus for that bill in the transportation. i believe that the karl moyer portion is in good standing, and but it is also tied into the same bills, so that is going to be the trick, if there is a fatal flaw with the ab 118 funding, issues. will that effect the ability to

move karl moyer program forward? that is what i was alluding to and i should have been more clear. >> any other questions, seeing none, let's open for public comment. any public comment? >> what? no public comment? >> no. okay. all right, public comment is closed. >> and let's see, this is an informational action, item, so is there actions that anyone would like to take on this item? >> hello? >> might to move for the recommendation? >> yes. >> i didn't hear you. >> i will move the recommendations. >> thank you, supervisor chiu. thank you so much commissioner. without, we will take the recommendation and madam clerk, could you call item number four? >> recommended increase of the amount of the professional services krt with perkins and

will by $395,000 to a total amount not-to-exceed $1555000 for planning urban design, conceptual engineering and out reach and environmental analysis services for better market street planning and environmental studsy authoritying the executive director to modify no one material contract terms and conditions. >> good evening, deputy for planning, this item is a request to amend an existing consulting contract that the authority has with perk ins and will, on behalf of the team leading and the department of public works which is leading the better market street project. lindy here is will be providing a brief overview and the main part of the item. i would like to give you background, began in october of 2010, after the authorities received planning grants from the state and the region. the initial contract was in the amount of $990,000, to do the design, conceptual design and out reach. we did come back in march in

2012 as an increase in lice of new work that needed to be done and that work did, we did make progress, the city team did out reach, developed some initial concept designs and did out reach on those and have identified since then, the need to or the desire to look at one more option which is an option on mission street to develop, complimentary facilities especially for the bicycle facility. this item begins on page 27 of your packet. and behind the memo on page 34, is a letter from the three directors of the mta. and sfmta dpw and planning department providing an overview of the options that are under development and under consideration. and this amendment here would allow for the development of mission street option to compliment the market street designs as an alternative or as a near term pilot.

following the letter from the directors is a study time line and budget snapshot so that you have a full update on the project. at this point, let me turn it over to mindy to provide the main presentation. >> thank you, kelley. >> could we please have the... okay. good morning, commissioner cohen and members of the committee, my name is mindy linesky i am with the better market team. i also have kelley the assistant manager and neal who is the urban design lead and andrew lee who is the transportation lead, and patrick revera who is the deputy division manager we are all here to be able to answer any questions that you might have. >> i have a question. >> supervisor weiner has a question. >> all right? >> and we have not gotten it. >> i know that we are all,

given the presentation, >> very quickly. >> the whole commission, authority meeting, i know that we are all very familiar with the status and as i know that you know this, a locality of frustration around the length of the process. and i think that also, we are being asked to allocate, funding for more study money and this is for analysis, is that right? >> point of clarification, where the action item is just a contract amendment and the budget is already allocated is my understanding from general funding to dpw. >> it is not a funding request. >> but it is still... >> it is a contract amendment to increase the amount of the contract. >> for study. >> correct. >> for additional tasks related to the mission. >> we have not done any short term trials or any kind of short term improvements yet?

>> i think that we have done some short term improvements over the last year and a half. we have specifically in november, the city constructed a west-bound left turn lane off of the bike bay cut off of market and velenicia and things that we are going for pedestrian improvement and we are doing 8 curbs. and 88 up and down the street. >> which we are required to do. >> we have paved the bike lanes on market and also the livable streets program is designing and coordinating improvements to the wiggle which will be implemented this year, but all of those, we are currently coming up with what would be short term immediate improvements and trying to decide at this point, which of those improvements should we do right now and which should we save for part of the environmental review? >> i know that there are plenty

of positive like improvements being made in various parts of the city including on the wiggle. i think that there is an understandable, frustration, that we are continuing to spend time and money on planning, which obviously we have to do the good planning no one is disputing that and not always taking some opportunities to do some short-term improvements, on market street, which i think would send the really positive signal about our collective desire to really make positive changes on market. and i know that we obviously can't do the major changes on market until we have studied and environmentally cleared it. but you know, it is challenging when we have items come back for more planning money whether it is a contract amendment or whatever it is. when we have not seen the changes that i know that we all want and i know that you want as well. so i just wanted to put that out there in terms of

additional plans for short term trials. >> right, point taken. >> okay. are there any other more? >> as i said we are putting together a list, and i am trying to figure out which can be specifically in short term and working with our materials under advisement under to which would be better set for environmental review and happy to share that with you at a later point. >> thank you. >> sure. >> madam chair? >> madam chair? >> yes, >> hoping that i could follow up on commissioner weiner's comments? >> thank you. >> i have to echo what commissioner weiner just said from my perspective, this feels like ground hog day we have been in hearing after hearing and constantly asked for additional increases to consultants to tell us a bit of what we already know. but, we have not received any real sense of what near time

projects and pilots might be available for this project and whatvy heard from you is we have been here which is they are coming. they are coming. i have to tell you that i have contemplated voting against this particular item but i understand that might appear arbitrary and i want to get a sense of when we will get this, and what are we actually spending our money on? >> i would say, within you see, i can commit to the next few months. we will give you that if not sooner. just, why are we going to take so long, given that we have been asked this question for a number of months and by the way i am sorry that you are the messenger, you have a very large team. >> part of it i think that they have been putting more of our efforts into these two options and really trying to figure out the pros and cons of the three

options. given no and how do those improvements fit in with those options. we have been having to answer your question that we have not been sitting around. we have been having numerous meetings with the environmental city attorneys, with the other departments, to try to figure that out. i guess that i can commit to even sooner. >> i think that would be helpful. >> okay. >> from my perspective, i think. i have considered voting against this, i might be willing to support this without recommendation to the full ta so that hopefully over the next very short one or two team period we can get a handle on what this is. i know that you vai have a presentation for us if you could look at the slides that describe the city project team and the city project team and just put that up on the screen.

>> this is a very significant team made up of representatives from dbw and the planning department and the mta and the cta and if you could go to the consultant team. colleagues, these are all of the teams that we have been funding for i think for the better part of how many years now? >> about two years. >> and from my perspective, we have received very little for the money that we have spent. additional increase, at this point, just feels challenging to me. i think in polite terms this is referred to as a cluster. and i would like to suggest, that you get your act together and provide us with ideas on the near projects because i am not particularly excited to continue to spend more money at this point when we have not been receiving what we need. >> okay.

>> okay. >> point taken. >> okay, commissioner tang? >> let's see. commissioner farrell. i would like to associate my comments with commissioner weiner and chiu is there a date that you can commit to come back to us, could we suggest one month from now? >> that would be fine. >> two weeks? >> two weeks. >> better. >> we have a finance committee meeting in two weeks? >> may i interject? i do have a hearing schedule for later this month or earlier, i can't recall the date of the land use committee. we wanted to make it far enough away from the previous authority meetings that there would be updates that the project team could provide so we were not just repeating and so, that hearing is happening. i don't want to, i prefer not to have too many hearings, but

if we could do whatever, but that hearing is happening at the land use committee. >> could you tell us, if you can't remember the date. >> i think that it it is early march or april and i can't recall. >> how about that? >> that would be fine. yeah. >> could you also, what i would like to see followed up by commissioner chiu's comments, it seems like we have been spending a lot of time on consultants without a lot of the on the groundwork and could you also provide a break down of the consultants and how much we have paid them and so we can understand and because these things have come up and in the grand scheme of things, it is real money, i understand the needs one off but to have a comprehensive picture of what is being spent and what the deliverables have been? i think will be extremely helpful. >> and that is for the future meeting or for right now? >> if you can provide it in the meantime, that is great. not for today. but if you can follow up with us send it to our offices i

think that will be very helpful. >> we have a detailed budget. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> madam clerk, could you tell me when is the next meeting? >> 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