environmental review, which i just don't think is warranted. i think an eir does not need to cost that much. we're not talking about the transbay plan or something like that. so i'm -- i don't accept this process as being the way we should be doing transportation in san francisco and i -- i can't support this item. >> you touched on [inaudible] mull symposiums and it's a big problem, not just here but in a lot of places. i want to recap some of these issues [inaudible] large scale with brt represents in the transbay type projects but things should go faster. clearly seqa is a

huge area of this. i do wanna note in the prior presentation mark indicated that does seem to be growing momentum. i think it's critical to push upon that as well as making sure that california implements but there are a number of things we can do and i think what underscores this is the project delivery pipeline is weak in san francisco. being able to push forward at an effective pace multiple projects at the same time instead of doing here's the central subway, we should be able to do with la and other places do is they have a whole self of projects that i've moving forward in tandem. they have a much bigger pool of capable project managers. we need more of them. much of the

dollars we spent so far haven't just been for seqa. [inaudible] but that needs to get done anyway. >> just to be clear -- and i've been a critic of the mta's project delivery system on small and big projects, but this project has not been turned over to the mta yet, but it has not been turned over and before we even turn it over to the mta for them to do the more detailed design, we'll have been spending 6 million dollars on environmental review and on conceptual designs so that --

it's frustrating, just raises a question for me. i'm not trying to dump on the ta stuff 'cause you are some of the most highly competent folks around. it's about the way we do projects in san francisco which is deeply dysfunctional. >> [inaudible] we're all doing this together, whether we're leading [inaudible] we all have to work together on this and the system as a whole needs reform and that's one of the things [inaudible] one of the outcomes [inaudible] is if we can [inaudible] either public or just city staff type symposiums or working sessions just to really focus on this issue and make some mediate reforms both at the small and big scale projects. >> at least with the better market street man, which we've

been critical of the lack of interagency coordination and the credible slowness and expense of the projects at least with market street, it's just incredibly more -- it's a radical reenvisioning of what mark market street is. geary brt is not that. it's not a simple design, but we know what brt is. we know -- it is not the same level of complexity and nebulousness as reenvisioning market street is. thank you. >> any other -- commissioner chew. >> so to understand, you're not planning to support this motion? >> i'm not going to support it.

>> question to the ta because, you know, i think many of us -- i share supervisor wiener's concerns. if you weren't able to move this forward, that may have some repercussions too. what can yo do you to to give us more comfort that this project is on the right track? >> i think the best thing to do is [inaudible] comments we made earl yes. [inaudible] up to director resting and to sit down and hash out and agree to hope flip and accelerated /sked /skwraoeul jewel for the project and to document that and how we're going to get there. not just throughing out a date, but do we need dedicated staff, do things in parallel, so forth. >> i want to join supervisor

wiener in stressing /ou important that is so a couple possibilities i'm open to is if we want to continue this item for a month or two to allow that to happen -- open to that. beyond that, if we're forced to take an up or down vote today i'm not sure what i would do because i want to make sure everyone involved in this project is taking this seriously and will make sure that we've got a plan to deal with this, but i looking for some feedback on how we can make sure that happens >> one of the challenges we have -- as you know august coming up so if the commit''s uncomfortable, i'm suggesting we move this to the full board without recommendation and that will give us about two weeks. >> why don't we move this forward recommending a no vote up to the full board and we'll wait to hear what you come back with in a couple weeks. in a week? is that right? >> july 23 is the full board meeting.

>> just a minute. are you done with your idea? okay. >> what are the chances that we're going to get meaningful, new information within two weeks. >> we can get some information but i can't commit without talking to director [inaudible]. >> i would consider putting this forward with a /tpheg tiff recommendation and maybe we can get some more information. >> you indicated you had some concern about going into the august recess. what exactly is the constraints on the timeline you're concerned about? >> i need to see if chester can add more if we need additional cash capacity for the jacob's contract and how much cash we have continued to work through recess if we don't take this action. >> are we not in a position to suspends work until we get some clarification? this project's taking forever already with the...

>> what's another month after nine years? >> i know this is [inaudible] a: >> you could suspends, but in the meantime, you know, we are continuing to work with commissioner mar and trying to finds a way to kick some speed into the project right now. >> let' see if there's any -- is there a motion or something... >> i guess i'll reiterate my motion... >> sorry, we'll take public comment before. >> hank you staff, thank you for your presentation and entertaining our comments. i'd like to open up for public comment now please. come forward. i'm very familiar with what's been going on with geary corridor for over 26

years since 1986. the geary brt is supposed to be -- having worked on prop k and having the priority, having the funding through brt in a priority three category, which means it can be moved up, the geary brt is supposed to be light rail ready [inaudible] that were finalized back in 1989 and 1995 on the height light rail that i worked on. you gotta remember it's also with the central subway that there's going to be a spur at union square at

geary and in a couple years we'll have to go before voters to reauthorize for prop k because the only project that hasn't been brought forward is the geary light rail system and i suggest that you act accordingly. i've told you before, do your homework, read the final report of the geary transit task force that was finalized in 1990 and also the 95 filing report on the geary light rail system and the puc quoted back then. it's the only way to alleviate traffic [inaudible] is called a light rail system, but it went nowhere. think about that before you have this go forward. >> okay. thank you very much. are there any other members of the public that like to speak

on item number eight? seeing no more public comment, it is closed. colleagues, i'd like to notate a motion. >> the motion that i suggested is we pass this to a full board with a do not pass recommendation in part to ensure that we will hear from staff in the next two weeks what conversations have happened and what can concretely change to help us speed this project along. that would be our motion. >> let's have a roll call /sroegs vote for in motion. >> chew, i, cohen i, /tpaeurl i tang i, commissioner wiener, i. commissioner which you's motion passes. >> thank you. are there any other items? >> item number nine, recommend the reward of a three year contract in the university of maryland [inaudible] case

study [inaudible] terms and non material contract terms and conditions. this is an action item. >> thank you. >> i'm robert traytive engineer with the [inaudible] on page 111 of your packet. as you know the transportation authority has served as coupon so are with the california department of transportation for the presidio parkway project. project is being built in two phases -- the phase one contract which substantial lyly we are

organizing it around six key

objects [inaudible] and maintenance of the [inaudible] identify the factors that determine the effect /t*euness of each method, identify and analyze advantages of each method, reach a con /khaougs as to which method reached better results in this project and best method /tp-f for future projects. academic institutions only we believe this was important for three reasons. increasing the independence and /kr-blt of the results both to the public and agency that need to make decisions of this type. we're

seeking recommendation to award this to your contract to university of maryland in an amount not to exceed to conduct this case study. happy to answer any questions. /tkpwh thank you. i think this is a great idea. i know there's been a lot of some controversy around some public private partnerships with t 3, particularly relating to [inaudible] drive so it seems to me this study will be useful not in terms of a back ward look in this particular project but in helping you form future decisions here and elsewhere about whether to proceed with that private partnership so i think this was a terrific idea and i'm glad it's happening. >> we agree and are happy to

have found university partners who think this is a great opportunity to contribute to knowledge in the field. >> commissioner /tpaeurl. >> just a quick question. in terms of university of maryland it /tkaouz seem kind of random. can you provide me with a little bit of background? >> university of colorado has similar experience. /ph*dz m.d. also is partnered with public policy professor to provide additional background and evaluation of the results. both universities intend to actually send graduate students to out here for minimum one semester to assist in the data collection and interviews of the project participants so they will have some on site capability for the main parts of the study.

>> thanks. >> any other speakers? i too, um, was surprised the university of maryland being awarded -- potentially awarding this contract. was there an rfp project? was there a competitive bid process. >> there was. we solicited /staeupltds of interest with qualifications. we re/saoefed six of those from universities all around the country. then we followed that up by inviting all six which we found qualified to submit proposals. >> which were the six that responded? >> i don't have the full list, but i can recall that we had maryland and colorado as a partnership, u washington partnered with -- stan /tpard university and i can't recall the other three, but i can get you that information. two of

the teams submitted formal proposals for the universities i understand that the creation and the submission of the proposal is not something taken lightly. both proposals were considered excellent and we chose this one on the basis of its more fleshed out plan for their data collection and investigation. >> and what was the criteria used to evaluate each of the proposals and who saturday on this body? >> we had three staff members are the authority on the body including lee. and we had advisory participants from arep who did some of the initial analysis of whether a p 3 made sense in this case. also a member of cal-trans as an advisory panel member. we hooked at the comprehensiveness of the proposal, how clearly it

related to our objectives and that's in order to make sure that the deliverables that we think will be of use to the authority and its partners -- that we will receive those, as well as whatever the academic institutions bring as interest. >> can you state what the deliverables will be? >> we'll have a final report that documents the construction process and results under both delivery methods, we'll have monitoring of the operations maintenance and manage /-pt of the infrastructure under the [inaudible] >> [inaudible]. >> yes, from 5-4. mm-hm. and then in addition to that final report we'll also have likely a

separate deliverable that talks about guidelines and decision processes that can be used for future projects? >> such as geary brt? >> any sort of project with complexity [inaudible]. a: thank you very much. let's entertain public comment on this item. >> having served on the [inaudible] as a represent /o*f the cac rep being very familiar with the presidio parkway project i strongly urge you to support this item because this makes a lot of sense. thank you very much. >> are there any other members of the public who would like to speak on this item? >> seeing none, public comment

closed. let's move this forward with unanimous vote. >> this is an information item. colleagues. okay. does anyone have any new items? seeing none. i'd like to entertain some public comment? anyone? pub click comment is closed. >> general public comment. >> general pub click comment. speak now or forever hold your peace or until the next meeting. thank you, seeing none, public comment is closed. are there any other matters before this body. >> no, item number 12, adjournment. >> thank you, this meeting is adjourned. thank you everyone.

>> hello, my name is jamie harper. in this episode, we are featuring the park locations in your very own backyard. this is your chance to find your heart in san francisco with someone special. golden gate park's largest body

of water is this lake, a popular spot for strolling and paddling around in boats, which can be rented. created in 1893, it was designed foreboding and -- for boating. it is named for the wild strawberries that once flores. a pleasant trail follows the perimeter past huntington falls, 110 foot waterfall. two bridges connect the trail to the island. the climb to the hills summit, the highest point in golden gate park at more than four hundred feet. you can get quinces of the western side of the city through -- glimpes of the western side of city through a thick trees. the lake is ada accessible. it has a peaceful atmosphere

where you can enjoy a warm day. walk along the lake and watched many ducks, and swans, and seagulls. it is a tranquil spot to stroll, enjoy each other's company, and sail away. many couples come here to take a ride around the lake, floating under the bridges, past the pavilion and waterfall. for a quiet getaway, it makes for a memorable and magical experience. located on 19th avenue, this grove is the place to wear your hiking boots, bring your family, and bring the dog because it has so much to offer you and your loved ones. it is a truly hidden gem in the city. the part is rich with eucalyptus

trees. long paths allow you to meander, perfect for dog walking in a wooded environment. >> i enjoy this base and the history behind it. the diversity that exists in such an urban city, the concrete, the streets, cars, we have this oasis of a natural environment. it reminds us of what san francisco initially was. >> this is a section for dogs and plenty of parking. transit is available to get you there easily. and the part is ada -- park is ada accessible. there is also a natural lake. this is your chance to stroll and let the kids run free. it also has many birds to watch. it is the place to find some

solitude from the city and appreciate what you share with a wonderful breath of fresh air. , an experienced this park and enjoy the peoples, picnics, and sunshine. this is a lovely place to take a stroll with your loved one hand in hand. located in the middle of pacific heights on top of a hill, lafayette park offers a great square a of a peaceful beauty. large trees border greenery. it features tables and benches, a playground, restaurants, and tennis courts. there are plenty of areas for football, frisbee, and picnics. it is very much a couple's part and there are a multitude of experiences you can have together.

bring your dog and watch the mean go with the community or just picnic at one of the many tables and enjoy all of the park has to offer. many couples find this is the perfect place to put down a blanket and soak up the sun. it is a majestic place you can share with someone you cherish. it is located along the 1 and 10 buses and is accessed from the 47 and 90 buses. it is ada accessible. for more information about reserving one of these locations, call 831-5500. this number is best for special events, weddings, picnics, and the county fair building. for any athletic fields and neighborhood parks, 831-5510. you can also write us.

or walking in and say hello at old lock cabin, golden gate park. and of course you can find more information and reach us at sfrecpark.org.

test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test >> ? the personnel committee of the county transportation authority. i'm john anticipate to my right commissioner eric mar and scott wiener and other commissioners. the clerk is ms. erica we're being broadcast by sftv thank you staff for your work >> madam clerk