uniformity. the region will have to make decisions and what it does is allows to us make the pilot and the way the pilot is working you are talking about a thousand bikes, 500 of them would be in san francisco and the rest would be distributed around the region. as we have that discussion of what the program should look like beyond the pilot, that's where i think we can take into account the issues around who should manage it. should it be the air district. right now the air district is seen as a potential agency to manage this, but i don't know, but they have decided and i don't know if that's necessarily the best decision at this point. should it be the ftc and something that is contracted out and outside company or non-profit. what does this look like for the region . those questions remain to be unanswered. but i'm supporting this because i think it allows

us to begin at least the pilot. and to be honest, the concern from people like supervisor wiener and myself too has not been doing the pilot, but actual the pilot is too small because in other cities, other regions that have done this, they have done more than a thousand bikes, they have done 10,000 bikes and several thousand bikes. one of the questions they had what was the program is too small and whether it will take off. that question remains unanswered. but we won't know unless we begin the process. >> thank you. that question and the point about the program being too small is exactly what's driving this request to bring this number of bikes to above 700 to a minimum threshold to have at least hope

of having a successful bicycle launch. >> this is another point i wanted to bring up and make sure this was accurate. it comes to about $1,000 a bike. when i think about and i know we are talking about transportation and talking about moving people around and we are talking about clean air an long term stability and regional approach, i think many of those points are well-taken, i just have a real problem with how much money we are spend to go do it. it's a lot of money for a bike. a thousand dollars for a bike, the amount of money we are spending for the bike share program. the challenges. why not just basically buy people bikes. why

not say we are going to reimburse you for your bikes if you agree to commute. in my mind this is a lot of money to spend on a bike sharing program and whether or not it could be sustain able long-term is not clear to memo. i'm not able to enter into agreement to a program that doesn't have a long term plan. in my experience, i feel like i have seen a lot of waste in the community over the years and in the case like this somebody is making money and somebody is not necessarily contributing or working with community like mine that needs the kind of support that a program could bring. i don't see any of the things that i care about most and i just don't want to continue to go down a path of spending money and not having

a long term plan and not seeing how this can make a difference. there is a lot of issues that i think i have with spending money like this, although as someone who worked at national lab, you jump on a bike and you go from one end of the lab to the next. at uc davis, it was a great friendly bike town and i think san francisco has to do more in terms of safety and roads. i realize that sometimes, under our general transportation process, you know, we are not working more collaboratively together and this is probably a great way to collaborate but i just look at the cost, i look at there has been to be something else more effective that this money could be spent on and i just take issue with spending this much money on a bike sharing

program. >> i see no other people from this committee speaking. i will just say that in reading through the mta and strategic sharing the mode an using this as a pilot and even just as the users making short trips connecting with cal trains, it's a well thought out process. it's not any of the district but in that concentrated area, the core that we talked about this meeting and really well thought out about how it maximizes the number of bicycle trips but reduce congestion on our transit system as well. i will say i hadn't read through much of the planning but i think it's well thought out, i think i would support commissioner campos pilot in the way we are looking at other cities and a

few other mta's are going to mexico city, i think clear channel runs that but there is different ways of organizing this. i think it's a well thought out project. i also support more bicycles in the key area that are in the city. >> yes, it's a thousand dollars per bike. this is part of solution. these bikes are like gps and they can't be stolen. the cost perspective if you remember this is the last mile the connection to transit. while bart thankfully they have been listing their bicycle access on board, we can we have still cannot bring bikes on munis, for those that cannot bring their bikes, this offers

an option for transit and the san francisco plan, there was a lot of those very short trips within the downtown and maybe those are possible through bike sharing. this is part of the comprehensive package and mta staff has a brief in the office. one of the beauties of the pilot is to be forced to do an evaluation so all of these questions can be answered. >> i appreciate commissioner breed's consistently pointing out how do we reduce cost. i did see that number and i thought that's a lot of must be per bike and that's an issue that came up at the mtc as well. unfortunately because of the infrastructure that you have to create with these kinds of programs there are certain cost that increase that. i can only speak from my own

experience and san francisco our largest economic driver is tourism. when i have traveled to other cities, they have a travel tourism project and we are so far behind. cities like washington d c and you see other areas that have this program. it provides an at some point to at least try something out and i am confident that the people involved whether it's at the ta, the m ta, the mtc that they are very mindful of the limited resources we have and they will do everything they can to make sure we maximize

every penny. i appreciate the point. >> thank you, let's open this up for public comment. >> good afternoon, i'm with the san francisco bicycle coalition. i would like to add my support. every neighborhood are requested bike racks faster than the city can implement them. the other note, commissioner breed, we are doing all that we can. we are partnering with the mtc and board of supervisors and the mayor's office to figure out how to implement a wonderful and robust bike program in san francisco. the denver bike system replaced their car traffic and we have seen how

other cities can do it. this funding allocation will help us get to a more robust pilot without it. and i think we understand how to get the data and how it works and be able to get this spread out. we have a lot of questions as well and working with partners to figure out what that ideal funding would be. i think this is a really important step to get us closer to implement something on the ground. i would appreciate your. approval. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> can we move this recommendation forward? >> i will make the motion to move forward with a positive recommendation. can we do this without objection? thank you. miss chang call the next item. item 8: recommend allocation of $1,608,747 in prop k funds, with conditions, to the san francisco municipal transportation agency for three requests, subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules and amendment of the relevant

5-year prioritization programs action* attachment as summarized in attachments 1 and 2, we have received three prop k requests from the san francisco municipal transportation agency sfmtaa totaling $1,608,747 to present to the plans and programs committee. the sfmta has requested $1,390,000 in prop k funds for the construction of new pedestrian countdown and accessible audiblee signals, and related curb ramps and signal upgrades at 12 locations citywide. the sfmta has also requested $153,747 in prop k funds for construction of a landscaped island and bulb-out to improve pedestrian safety and shorten the crossing distance between augusta and waterville streets on silver avenue. this project will be constructed through the department of public works' silver avenue sewer, water, and pavement renovation project. lastly, the sfmta has requested $65,000 in prop k funds to install and evaluate a demonstration bikeway and pedestrian safety project on one yet to be determined block of polk street between union and post streets. improvements would be in place by september 2013 and may include temporary designated bikeways, curb extensions created with pavement markings, traffic barriers, and modular seating as a way to validate how these types of permanent treatments would enhance the safety and attractiveness of the street for pedestrians and cyclists, and to evaluate the potential impacts to transit, parking and commercial loading. evaluation of this project is intended to inform the design of the larger polk street improvement project currently in the planning phase and funded by the prop b streets bond. we are seeking a recommendation to allocate $1,608,747 in prop k funds, with conditions, to sfmta for three requests, subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules, and to amend the relevant 5-year prioritization programs. 4 >> good afternoon commissioners. this item begins on page 43 of your packet. we are recommending allocations for prop k funds for the project. the first project is to install new pedestrian signals. there are 6 pedestrian count down signals with timers and six accessible and audio signals. the locations of these signals is shown on page 57 of your packet. there are also associated with other improvements that will be provided with this. the prop k funds funded the design phase which is a hundred percent

complete. next project is the polk street demonstration project. the fta requested $5,000 to construct and evaluate a demonstration on polk in different locations. the demonstration project will install improvements like by ways and temporary curb extensions with pavement marking. this will allow mta to study the potential impacts of these types of treatments, these types of bicycle and safety and pedestrian improvement which is funded by $8 million in street bond improvement funds. that larger project is mccallister to

union. this is for this summer. the prop k funds are funding also an evaluation of the project in order to inform the impacts of the project on transit project and commercial loading since there has been a lot of concern about that potential impacts. we presented this item to the cac at our last month's meeting without a rms recommendation at that time they did not have a completed design or evaluate a methodology for construction funds from prop k, mta hasn't fully addressed these issues. in an effort to move the projects forward in the community, we are recommendeded this project for allocation at this time. >> the last allocation is

$154,000 for the mta for landscape in august a and this will shorn the project between the intersection along silver t business or occupation will be constructed and will start this summer. i'm available to answer any questions you have. >> i see no questions. let's open this up for public comment. anyone from the public who would like to speak? miss sak's? >> i was at the cac meeting and voiced my concern about this item. the polk situation. you

have to move for consideration the people that were there, that people that work there, they also the small businesses that have no place else to park to load and unload their goods on polk street and plus you have that large walgreen's. we did not make a recommendation. we didn't want this go forward because we want more work done out of it and more studying done on it before you try to take away the parking and the safety for the people in the

neighborhood. thank you very much. >> next speaker? is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> can we move this item forward without objection? >> moved. thank you. miss chang please call the next item. >> item no. 9. item 9: recommend appropriation of $240,432 in prop k funds, with conditions, for environmental analysis and advanced conceptual engineering and an allocation of $1,311,847 in prop k funds, with conditions, to the san francisco municipal transportation agency for preliminary engineering for the van ness avenue bus rapid transit brtt project, subject to the attached cash flow distribution schedules, and amendment of the brt/transit preferential streets/muni metro network 5-year prioritization program action* attachment since 2007, the authority has served as lead agency for environmental review and conceptual design of the van ness avenue bus rapid transit project brtt, and has led project development of this first brt project for the city, in close partnership with the san francisco municipal transportation agency sfmtaa. the sfmta will assume the role as project lead upon receipt of a federal record of decision rodd for the project. we are seeking a recommendation to appropriate $240,432 in prop k funds to complete environmental review and project development leading to the rod, anticipated in september 2013, and allocation of $1,311,847 in prop k funds to the sfmta for preliminary engineering for the van ness avenue brt project. the sfmta's scope of work will

advance design engineering to 30 >> for preliminary engineering. subject to the attached cash flow description schedules. >> good afternoon commissioners this item begins on page 121 of the packet. i will be brief. i know we are running behind. a brief background on the project. the main goal of the project is of course to fill in the heavy route infrastructure gap on the north size of the city as well as regional bus and rail plans. the purpose and need of the project to really improve reliability speed and comfort and this is through dedicated transit lanes for autos and other delays and in addition to just a transit project is focused on pedestrian safety and because of u.s. 101 we want to accommodate and maintain a similar number of travelers in the area. as chair mar said, this is a combination of a

bunch of features. to include in the environmental document the center running. it runs alongside the median with the left most travel lanes and then comes towards the center of the street. it also involves limiting the turns with the exception of broadway and left tun on lombardy. a significant and helps to reduce the operating cost of the system. there are some concerns to traffic on neighboring streets and parking and traveng

consolidation and we've actually partially address some of these in the final environmental document which we'll bring forward to you as well. there is just a couple months. the project cost is $125.6 million. this is two sets of that, one in environmental conception hearing and for the total cost of $7.5 million. >> they achieve a benefit of rail for a fraction of the cost. what percentage would be covered for a $125 million? >> we looked at this part of the screening report for this project. light rail was on the order on the light rail and close to the cost of 10

billion. this is still on the lower side. >> there is two request. it's matched by fta small start funds which have already been appropriated by the sfmta and also by prop k funds by $40,000. this is involving documents as well as federal approvals. this is really working with the state historic preservation officers. this is when we brought the project last year. this is additional conception hearing addressing community concerns which is safety and traffic concerns and tree loss issues and we really work to refine all of these issues. we've also had to do

work with permit agencies like cal trans to meet their design standards, the historic process and the design and review committee was advanced. it was brought forward and i'm please today say i will get to this in a moment that we have cal trans approves and there is a significant achievement for the project the final environmental document is near the end of this face. the second request is allocation for mta for $1.3 million matched in mta funds, that match is being brought forward earlier up to 75 $75 million for the for the project to cover the contingency part of the request. it's

preliminary engineering and we bring this to 24 months. there is an increase in budget versus the appropriation in the summer brought 2010 and this is due to shift and responses due to increase management from authority and consultants to mta and there is associated cost in rates due to the timeline taking longer and sequencing study. >> a quick snapshot of the project funding. we have $107 million in unidentified funding it's about an $18 million funding gap. we are in a pretty good spot for this phase and in potential areas for closing that gap. it's rated high for the costeffectiveness. the schedule for the project, we are in the middle of finishing up the final environmental

document and as i said we plan to bring that to the board for the summer for verification. well complete the final environmental process. the design and implementation with construction starting in the fall of 2015 ending at the end of the 2017 with operations begins 2018. >> thank you for get tloog that you so quickly. i see no questions. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> can we move forward this appropriation without objection? okay. thank you. >> miss chang please call the last item. >> item 10: fiscal year 2013/14 prop k annual call for projects information* attachment enclosure the intent of the annual call for prop k projects is to bring as many of the programmatic and other individual capital project allocations to the authority board for action in june. this allows project

sponsors to incorporate the level of prop k funding in their annual budget processes, and to put into place the staff and other resources necessary to deliver prop k projects and programs. project sponsors that can demonstrate need and project readiness can also receive allocations for individual projects and programs during the year. we received five applications a low volumee by april 1 in response to the fiscal year 2013/14 prop k annual call for projects, requesting approximately $11.9 million in prop k funds and $248,000 in prop aa funds. this month we are presenting the allocation requests as submitted to the plans and programs committee committeee for information and without recommendations. we will bring our recommendations for the annual call to the committee for action in june. attachment 1 summarizes the applications received, including project phases and the proposed leveraging compared to expenditure plan assumptions. attachment 2 provides a brief description of each project. attachment 3 highlights issues of potential interest to the committee and policy considerations that we are exploring as part of our on-going review of the allocation requests. we are seeking input and guidance from the plans and programs committee. this is an information item. 3 this is an information item. >> this item begins on page 193 of your packet. with interest in time we urge to you skip this item and discuss it next month when all of these projects when bike munis, the department of public works transportation and maintenance programs and the san francisco environmental transportation program will be included as an action item at next months meetings. excellent. colleagues can we continue this program without objection. >> so moved. >> the next item, this is an information item. >> is there anyone from the public. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed..

>> item 12. public comment. >> miss sacs. >> regarding the new traffic signals. taking into consideration. i know i walk fast. but i know i walk fast. i have looked this before when the traffic lights when this item is brought up in front of the cac. you should take into consideration not an average size person walking across the street, have someone in a wheelchair cross the street and see how long it actually takes them to make it from one side

to the other safely especially when you have the right turn on red and a lot of motorist refuse to yield to pedestrians of the crosswalk. take that into consideration when you consider these signals. >> thank you. i want to thank miss sacs for always being the eyes and ears in the community. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> miss chang call the next item. >> adjournment. >> thank you, meeting adjourned. >>

i'm nicole and lindsey, i like the fresh air. when we sign up, it's always so gratifying. we want to be here. so i'm very excite ied to be here today.

>> your volunteerism is appreciated most definitely. >> last year we were able to do 6,000 hours volunteering. without that we can't survive. volunteering is really important because we can't do this. it's important to understand and a concept of learning how to take care of this park. we have almost a 160 acres in the district 10 area. >> it's fun to come out here. >> we have a park. it's better

to take some of the stuff off the fences so people can look at the park. >> the street, every time, our friends. >> i think everybody should give back. we are very fortunate. we are successful with the company and it's time to give back. it's a great place for us. the weather is nice. no rain. beautiful san francisco. >> it's a great way to be able to have fun and give back and walk away with a great feeling. for more opportunities we have volunteering every single day of the week. get in touch with

the parks and recreation center so come >> good afternoon, everyone. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors budget and finance committee meeting for wednesday, may 29th, 2013. my name is supervisor mark farrell. i will be chairing today's committee joined by committee members and supervisor john avalos, supervisor scott wiener and supervisor london breed. joined momentarily by chair supervisor eric mar. want to thank the members of sfgov-tv john ross and jeff as well as the clerk of the committee mr. victor young. mr. clerk, do we have any announcements? >> yes. please silence all foexctiontionv and electronic devices. completed speaker cards and copies of any documents to be com included as part of the file should be submited to the clerk. items acted upon today