sort of a variation on alternative 3 the center lane bus rapid transit project. this involves a consolidated approach that used both the limited and local service essentially operating the same facility. the goals that have come out of the meeting with mta and reflecting the urgency that the commissioners have communicated to us is to certify the document and have a full transmitted service by 2018. the key, of course, is how do we get there. so where what are the means to achieving those goals. we think one of the most useful

is to take vague of the federal map legislation 3 will help us to identify the local identification earlier and keep it within the document. a significant amount of effort was exerted in the vanessa document after the circulation and incorporating that into the final document we can save a significant amount of time. we think the project will allow early deployment of side running improvements in the inner gary and those could be deployed that eventually we'll have the service provided peril. mta and ta are embracing the

idea so the people can see the improvements. and mta is very focused on the low cost improvements immediately fund the certification of the environmental document. in fact, mta has announced the goals by mid 2014 in the mid gary area. looking at oiflg a locally identified alternative in the document there are a couple of options that we think have the potential of becoming the alternative. and their depektd here. it would include the option to

provide a filed at fillmore in order to reconnect the community that maybe as much of a land use and community issue as a transportation issue by those optioned will allow this to be done. side lynn b r t would be provided and the center lane b r t to 22 avenue and a consolidated bus service further to the west. other maples of accelerating deliver including looking at number one traditionally means of delivering the project. maria mentioned the designed risk and we've done that on the vanessa project we we can the same thing can be done on gary.

we're confident we know what the alternative is and that's the time to begin van the work. we're looking at the non traditional means of construction. the construction management guaranteed management these are variations of construction methods that are generally proven to speed project delivery and they tend to be a little bit better of job allocation. we're also looking at strengthening our project management approach. we're moving forward with integrating the authority into a single team. i will say that the representative and team members from the two agencies meet twice a week on the project and we're seeing the people who are

participating in the project more and more becoming a chief team. one of my falsifies is when we reach a joint decision to try to move on. the same thing in project delivery you only make the decision once there's a tendency to try to recycle back and that's a speed killer. as maria suggested we're looking at to have the two agency require and receive a periodic updates that look at scheduled compliance and budget compliance. as part of the formation of looking at the procedures as

disputes occur they don't fetter at the staff level and remain unsolved. and that the form escalation has form deadlines so the project can move forward. and lastly we're working with mta to streamline the hand off once the environmental document is ready to go further. and that concludes the presentation. i'll be happy to answer any other questions >> colleagues any comments or questions? >>. okay. thank you week go on to public comment on this item or those items. >> good morning. i'm jackie sax

i'm a member of the citizens advisory committee i've been involved with the item open gary boulevard since 1986 and back then i was appointed to the gary transit task force to look at the feasibility of the gary light rail system and this sort of thing but it was put in the sales tax passage. the gary light rail project is the only project that was grandfathered. and the gary rapid transit project is supposed to be rail ready. also you have to remember that it's a central sub by the way, there's a stop at the union

square and there's a spur at union square for the gary light rail system and you're going to have to go before the voters to authorize and extend that. so you have to take the all that take into consideration. and also the way the gary task force final report came out we would have a service from gary and market to gary and laguna and go out the center strip to fillmore to masonic and straight out to the beach. read the final report of the gary task force and it was published in 1990 and all the other work published regarding a

light rail system on gary boulevard >> thank you very much. >> any member of the public want to commit? seeing none, public comment is closed >> madam clerk if we could have a roll call vote and a (calling names) the tomes passed. >> if you get call items 18 and 20 prelim and a item 18 a two year contract in an amount not to exceed 2 had the and plus and

negotiate the contract payment terms and the non payment concerns. and item 20 approve the appointment of the bus rapid transit community and this is an action item >> thank you madam clerk. colleagues on this i have a question and a possible amendment. the question is around geneva bus rapid transit. there's been a lot of concern around members of my district to make sure there's an effort to look at light rail along geneva corridor and the bus rapid transit perhaps there's a way to look at this towards light rail and it's important inform address the study that will be moving forward particle today.

if i could get a response from staff or the mta on the feasibility of that analysis? >> feel free to come to the mid again. on this item on page 182 with respect to the scope of the awarding contract. we included an optional task just to - i want to emphasis this is a short-term improvement of the extort transit district that's something to the development agreement that's going to be put into place. and the sfmta information on this the mta is interested in the operational benefits which

could enable the transit to into up to the market street tunnel. and to not prevent access it that facility. i'm understanding clarifying the revenue service ridership potential just recognizing it's two different ridership or travel routes so it could go up to the park and the rail line would cut off past bay shore. we can look at this in the stud but julie asked we confer with her whether there our report or consultants. if you can be flexible on how this can be done arrest or.

>> one of the things we've been talking about because of the issues we've been talking about we're about to start a scoping session on fixing some key bottle necks in the network. we have some key ones that are causing liability and one of them is not having the runtcy through the facilities. it's a significant issue if something goes wrong in one of those areas the rail is cut off. so we said want to start the discussions and do that under that scenario but to help improve the next time performance. it could be looking revenue service in the future that would be definitely part of it because whatever we can do to prevent

redundancy. we're not sure how much dialing detail into this study and a could it be that there needs to be some kind of reference to the bus rapid study for geneva after it would be necessary to have it in the report >> if it goes to the mta report the mta should look at the high ridership. and - >> is the mta looking at the redundancy of the light rail vehicle and the light transit on the same system is it possible. >> understand that the rail piece would be long-term, the

bus transit would be short-term and the next in the next couple of years. >> that's what people want tongs we have some redundancy in the light rail system so we can make some improvements and not create a complete disaster if one goes down. >> we could see what the demand ridership is to further include the bus system we will look at that. >> appreciate that. colleagues any other proposed amendment is to item 20 is the advisory committee for geneva bus rapid transit. i want to make sure we have another neighborhood that is

realignment in my neighborhood is i want to take one of the at large seats and moving that towards a neighborhood seat in my neighborhood as defined by 280 open the west and ocean avenue and ashton to the north and holloway and brotherhood way to the southern border. that would include the neighborhood that's more adjacent to the geneva avenue for inclusion on the c r.c. and i wonder in if the t r staff is okay with this >> we can do it with board

approve. >> staff could i brief go over with us the make up of the c r.c. as well as the passenger seat bodies. >> it's on page 2 hundred and 17 of your packet. it's an easy c r.c. so the seats are split between san francisco and san mateo. the comtion would have one seat in the bay point neighborhood and two seats for the little hollywood valley altogether and two seats out at mission and there's one appoint by san mateo and then two at large seats so there would be one at large seat

and one san francisco seat added >> so i understand to make sure i understand we're talking about a 9 member body? >> seeing it is - 11 members we'd simply change one of the san francisco at large seat to a local seat. >> very good. and that seat would be a member of district 11 or 7. my neighborhood covers both district. i'd like to make that amendment. okay seconded by commissioner cowen. and colleagues can we take that out objection. okay. he amendment is made. and then those items we can open up for public committed. any pun member want to commit?

seeing none, public comment is closed. i think we have a change hoists so 23 we could do a roll call vote on those items. yes and on 18 and 20 as amended (calling names) these items pass >> the items pass. thank you. madam clerk our next item is our closed session. actually, i was caring whether or not we wanted to go into closed session we can - we're

going to have interviews with 3 candidates for today but due to unforeseen circumstances we'll be postponing those until the 30th of next week. but i'm willing to go into clogsz session if suggested by the commission >> i think we're hearing everyone is okay. so why don't we do public comment and we'll continue this item until next week. so public comment is open on this item. and ms. sax >> i certainly hope that you realize the fact that lombardi

has been stepping in for a gentleman when we couldn't take the meetings and everything in the - i've been involved with the various prop 89 but that everything was done - all the hiring was done in house they did it from within and she's very qualified. she understands what she's doing. i strongly suggest i vote for her. i know that the whole department supports her >> any of the public want to incriminating comment? >> ms. sax i'll agree that

she's done a wonderful job for the transportation authority and i'm sure she appreciates your comments as well. so colleagues we have had our full discussion at the intellectual committee so we'll not be meeting we've got 3 names and we'll be interviewing those candidates next tuesday and this meeting will be for the whole discussion. beginning in september we'll make a final determination for the if not lift and look forward to having that discussion next week and making our final decision. so we can go on to our next item which is item 23.

introduction of new items. >> commissioner breed. >> thank you. i'll be brief. i just want to request a hearing at the september plans meeting concerning the posh for the mta tow increase passenger capacity of our light rail vehicles. this is an issue that i have been interested in for sometime. i understand the mta has start the process of pursuing to replace the existing fleet and those some be configured. but they won't arrive for several years and we have serious overcrowding now. reconvene fingering the seats will alleviate the crowding. i said the staff to collaborate

on the feasibility of doing this. so thank you very much. >> thank you, commissioners breed. colleagues any other comments for introduction. okay. we go onto the public comment on this item. any member of the public want to commit? seeing none, public comment is closed >> item 24 public comment. >> time for a general public comment. >> chair avalos i'm glad you agree with me what i said earlier about maria but i want i all to understand you need to have someone that understands the city and understands our transit system that knows what's going on and then not having

someone costa mesa coming from outside and saying this is what's going on the other end of the country you should take into consideration that as well. also i was supposed to be up for reappointment today but i'm not going to worry about it. it's on the agenda. if i have to wait another month i'll do it or two months but my term ended this month so take it from there thank you very much >> ms. sax you are reappointed to your seat on your u our calendar congratulations. >> thank you very much. >> if there are no other members of the public wishing to commit. public comment is closed. and madam clerk call our next item >> item 25 i will adjournment.

>> colleagues we're adjourned.

>> on december 28, 1912, san francisco mayor stared into a sea of 60,000 of constituents that gathered at geary.

the berth of the first publicly owned transit system in the city, the san francisco municipal railway.will

begin shortly.