strategy. but, so we are waiting for that to happen in the regional level to come to a position on what the state level and another important thing on the next session is going to be looking at the thresholds and potentially, for the transportation and other, either measures or revenue measure and looking at many, many bills up there regarding the structure of the district and so looking at least to move forward with that. and so, i'm happy to answer any questions and otherwise we will be bringing over the state and federal legislative programs to the citizens in january and to this committee and the board in february, thank you. >> colleagues are there any questions for this item? >> seeing none, thank you very much. >> and thank you. >> and this is madam clerk is this an action item? >> okay, so let's do a roll call and take the public comment on the item, item four is there any public comment?

>> public comment is closed. thank you very much. and let's, do the roll call vote. >> okay, item four. >> chu. >> aye. >> commissioner cohen aye. >> ferrill, absent. >> and passed. >> item five, recommend award of 18-month consultant contract to the sand c engineers in an amount not-to-exceed the $450,000 for construction management support services for the folsom street off-ramp realignment project and the authoritying of the executive director to negotiate the contract. >> hi good morning, my name is liz and i am a senior engineer, with the transportation authority and i am the project manager for this project.

>> one ramp to free mo*nt and one to fulsom it cuts the parcel in half and reduces the potential redevelopment size of what we called block 8 and those in agreement with cal trans, to turnover the portion of the area of once it is realigned to the city for the smaller piece that the city

owns and to sell the property for the redevelopment to fund the project. and this is part of the transpay redevelopment plans and the open skate. and project. to realign to make it with the existing ramp on freemont street and without a traffic signal and provide for the president crossing across the base of the ramp and then allowing for the redevelopment of the parcel. and to do this, we also with the freemont street and so that all turn and movements will be preserved and all assets will be preserved instead of the

right that you come off of the ramp now you will come down to the ramp and make a 90 degree and go up to the single. >> the car pool don't they drop off in this area? >> they will be able to do that and that will remain open during the construction. and the off-ramp and the off-ramp will remain throughout construction. >> and so nothing will be disturbed. >> no. >> thank you.

>> i actually got the 100 percent yesterday and so we are at 100 percent design and so the transportation authority is going to administer this contract and they had other approached us to do the design work and asked us for the implementation for construction and the execution of that agreement with them, for construction services, and this is expected to be approved by the board and estimating this afternoon and we have worked out the memo agreement terms already and he execution that i am here about is depend og that agreement later on today. and the schedule is that we will complete in december and advertise if february with award in april and start the

construction in may, and to complete by the end of 2014. we set the goal of 100 percent and we received 6 proposals on october first and all received, the 100 percent goal and we short listed three of the firms. >> could you tell us who the sbe and dbe goal was set and what level is that? is it a certain percentage of the contract? >> yes, it is a percentage of the work assigned to the firms. >> correct. what is that percentage? >> 100 percent. >> the goal is set at 100 percent. >> okay. >> and all firms achieve that goal that we had set. we short listed the firms and we interviewed all of the firms on october 15th. >> what does that mean?

>> we reviewed all six proposals and we had a scoring based on the technical merit and the what they showed and the hours that they were intending to do and it was not cost-based in any way, and cost proposals were not reviewed at all and then, the proposals were then... and there were four different reviewers and myself, and a member from cal trans, and the member of the infrastructure and dpw who will be providing the services for their portion. >> okay. >> thank you. >> and short listed we took the top three firms and there was a large gap between the third and fourth ranked firm and so we had the top three firms come in from interview and we participated in the interview process. and we then, went through the same criteria and length of

this again. and the engineers came out, and significantly on top of, all four evaluations. and so, they directed us in the engineers and their team, and as a most relevant, and best qualified. >> and the team includes, themselves, charging the associates for serving, and the inspection services. and all three are qualified, under spe and de. >> the project is sponsored by the ocii and will reimburse the authority for all costs associated with all of the agreements so that we will be signing an agreement with them. and they will then authorize us to make the agreements with spw and sfmta and if necessary, with cal transfor the inspection and other spefrtions throughout the project. and we, already have an

agreement with ocii for the design services and there are several executing in 2008 and 2011 initially with the redevelopment agency and the new memo agreement does not expected to be signed today. and so the staff recommendation is to award the contract to the fcc engineers and not-to-exceed, 450,000 for the construction management services. >> okay. thank you. very much. >> do you have any questions on this item? >> public comment is open. >> (inaudible) with the folsom street and to the bay bridge, and this are moved to the light

to it... and it was (inaudible) >> i am sorry, what? >> (inaudible), the driver, from san francisco to east bay. >> give me a second. sir? so the public comment works, we take your comment. two minutes. >> (inaudible). >> thank you, okay. so are there any other public comment at this time? >> okay, i would like to bring the project manager to answer the question. i believe that the question about... >> i think that the question to the impact of the traffic. >> right. this is a road that comes off of the bridge and it lands on freemont street which the drivers can only go north on freemont street and the traffic signal is for the pedestrian crossing only and so when are there no pedestrians present, the traffic coming down around the ramp will be able to continue the free flow that

they enjoy today and when they will be stopped in the area. and there is a trigger. >> we will close the public comment on this item. >> could you call item number five? >> i am sorry, the action item. >> take a vote on this. item. could you please do a roll call vote. >> sure. >> commissioner chu, aye. >> and farrell, absent. >> weiner. >> aye. >> and cohen.

>> aye. passes. >> item 6, increasing the amount of cooperative agreement, no, 4-2283 with the california department of transportation by 1,319,40. >> good morning, good morning, chair, cohen and commissioners it is good to be here again and i have a brief presentation for the ramps here and the existence with the cal trans. and we should have a hand out in front of you, and let's just quickly talk about the project itself. it is on the on and off bound ramps on the east side and the traffic is independent of the bridge but ultimately we need to tie into the bay bridge and the construction, phase is funded with the federal, highway bridge program, and with the state platform with the seismic retrofit programs to the tune of 77.5 million

dollars. we have obtained it and with the agreements of tita and the essence there and the management that went on for that project. and they will administer the contract with the cal transand title oversight and we have already, advertised the project and we are currently evaluating the contract bids and the intent is to be back here in december to recommend an award of a construction contract 79 million, from the money and the money to the tune of 93.37 million and a contribution of ten million dollars, and over. and the phase that also is showing a phase by funding

source approximately, 60 million for environmental and civil engineering and we have the costs of 4.2 million for the right-of-way that was required for the project. and the construction at 77.5 million. and let's talk about the agreement now in specifics, if you recall, back in march of 2010, we executed the cooperative agreement, 4.2383 with cal trans, and provided 417,000 and 600 dollars for as part of the cal trans, san francisco, oakland bay bridge to physically accommodate the connection of the ramps and if you drive by right now and you notice on the right side there is actually what is called the temporary k-rail in the areas that we are going to physically connect to and we issued an amendment and approved in may of 2011, and basically it indicated that it required the completing of the ramps by

december of 2018 and just so that you know, the schedule calls for us completing the project by the summer of 2016 and so it is in terms of the schedule. and finally let's talk specifics about amendment number two and provides up to 1.3 million dollars and one million 319,400 dollars, and of additional competition to the cal trans, and really what it is is additional improvements that we have identified the need to be performed as part of the project. and so i would also, specifically, additional structure work, concrete, foundation and pile extensions and then also some decorative lights that we are going to match similar to the ones on the bay bridge right now. >> are they going to be flashing like the ones on the bay bridge? >> no. actually similar to the new e span, and some of the decorative lights and they are light in color and then the good news here is amendment number two and this is 100

percent reimbursed by the state prop 1 b money. and finally the staff recommendation, and the recommending of the increasing the amount of the cooperative agreement with the cal, trans, to a total amount not-to-exceed, 2 million, 35,000 for the jbr ranch project and authorizing the executive director to modify the condition and that completes my presentation. >> thank you very much. >> and all right, let's see, let's take some public comment on this. >> and please, you will need to raise your hand and just come up. >> and let me answer. and do we have... december 31, 2018. for the (inaudible) island, and to be completed and (inaudible) much sooner less than two years and five years span. >> okay. are there any other public

comments? >> would you come and answer the question? thank you. >> just to clarify. our intent is to start the construction of january of next year and 2014 and to complete by the summer of 2016 and so we are looking at two and a half year construction period. thank you. >> thank you, very much. >> and okay seeing no other public comment or comments from the colleagues, it is closed and thank you very much. and madam clerk, this is an action item and so colleagues if there is no objection, this motion carries forward. >> thank you very much. >> item 7. >> item 7, this is an information item. >> thank you. it is an information item. >> introduction of new items seeing none, okay. >> could you please call item eight.

>> i will take public comment on the introduction of new items. public comment is closed, general public comment, this is the time that you can talk about generally anything. no general public comment? >> okay, again public comment is closed. and what is the next item? >> adjournment. >> excellent. >> thank you everyone, this meeting is adjourned. san fran

transportation authority. >> good morning, everyone. this is tuesday november 19, 2013, meeting of the plans and programs committee of san francisco county transportation authority. our clerk is miss erica chang. i want to thank sfgtv staffers for broadcasting us today. please call the roll. >> the clerk: breed, campos,

yee, we have a quorum. >> please call item no. 1. approval of october 8th, meeting. >> anyone would like to speak on the minutes? >> good morning, members of the board. i apologize for my accent but last time when i say that cal trans did not bear any resemblance to europe. i meant to spell bar, not bare. thank you. >> is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. i would like to make a recommendation that we correct that typo. are there any objections to that? can we approve the minutes without objection? thank you. >> miss chang, please call item

3. >> the clerk: citizens advisory report. this is a commission item. >> i apologize for my accent as well. >> it's a richmond district accent. >> we, the transportation committee the advisory committee had two action items that are also on your agenda, items no. 5 and 8. on item no. 5, we passed that unanimously after some discussion most of which i think was positive. the bulk of the request that that item is for is for as related to the transportation effectiveness process and our chair asked whether these items would increase capacity and the answer for that from shawn kennedy, the mta staff said that would be dependent on the

number of vehicles that were in service which was not a capital cost which was not under this item. the other item we had was no. 8, that was for strategic analysis report related to regional and bike projects. we again passed that unanimously. though our agenda item asks only for $18,000. your agenda item includes and additional $25,000 for optional technical tasks. we didn't discuss that so i'm not going to speculate on whether or not we voted to approve that. that is my report. >> colleagues we are joined by commissioner london breed as well. do we have any questions? it's nice to see members of

the advisory committee. thanks for being here. >> pleased to be here. >> anyone from the public would like to speak, please come forward. mr. williams from the transit drivers union. >> good morning, chairman, mar, committee members. i just want to bring up the fact with the citizens advisory committee that there is a lot of things going on right now with transportation that need to be dealt with today and could be dealt with today with some correct funding. particularly this morning. we had a melt down in the station once again coming down market. i brought this up at the sf mta board and nobody wants to listen. if you want to keep this system flowing, one thing we found out that the eureka street tunnel is still working. if there is a meltdown at castro on down, you can bring these street cars out

of the tunnel at eureka with an adjustment to the overhead wiring, maybe some adjustments going down market to accommodate the trains. what about today? how are we going to fix the systems problems today? none of these funds, and i respect the committees report, but there is nothing to address the issues today. there are many issues today and some funding must be allocated to this process. it has to be. everybody is talking 5-30 years out. there is a plan to at least fix some of the problems today. so please. all the problems going anywhere. do the citizens really know they are not going whenever they should be going today. >> is there anyone else from the public that would like to

speak? >> good morning commissioners, my name is jackie sak's. the member of the advisory committee. as mr. larkin said this item was brought up against the cac last month and we discussed it. one thing you have to remember is that the gentleman before me talked about all the money coming out of prop k. the one thing you have to remember is that prop b after 1999 i worked on was grandfathered in prop k that i also worked on. in a couple years you have to go against the voters again to extend prop k. now, before you ask for this money now, figure out what has been done in prop k, what has not done in prop b and get the money for those items first.

fix the system as it is now before you try to go on in the future. i know you are looking ahead to this sort of thing. if it ain't broke, don't fix it. the mta board, there is no reason they ask for this money because they have a budget and they should deal with what they have got and take it from there. deal with their money first. that's what they are there for. thank you very much. >> thank you, miss sacs. and for the record the previous speaker was eric -- from the transit union. anyone else would like to speak? thank you. public comment is closed. >> next item. >> the clerk: the appointment of two members to the citizens

advisory committee. >> yes. by way of background, the transportation authority has an 11 member advisory committee. item 4: recommend appointment of two members to the citizens advisory committee action* attachment enclosure the authority has an eleven-member citizens advisory committee cacc. cac members serve two-year terms. per the authority's administrative code, the plans and programs committee recommends and the authority board appoints individuals to fill any cac vacancies. neither authority staff nor the cac make any recommendations on cac appointments, but we maintain an up-to-date database of applications for cac membership. a chart with information about current cac members is attached, showing ethnicity, gender, neighborhood of residence, and affiliation. there are two vacancies on the cac requiring committee action. this vacancy results from the resignation of aaron goldsmith due to relocation and the term expiration of robert switzer. we are pending confirmation whether mr. switzer wishes to seek reappointment. we are seeking a recommendation to appoint two members to the cac. an 11 member advisory committee. item 4: recommend appointment of two members to the citizens advisory committee action* attachment enclosure the authority has an eleven-member citizens advisory committee cacc. cac members serve two-year terms. per the authority's administrative code, the plans and programs committee recommends and the authority board appoints individuals to fill any cac vacancies. neither authority staff nor the cac make any recommendations on cac appointments, but we maintain an up-to-date database of applications for cac membership. a chart with

information about current cac members is attached, showing ethnicity, gender, neighborhood of residence, and affiliation. there are two vacancies on the cac requiring committee action. this vacancy results from the resignation of aaron goldsmith due to relocation and the term expiration of robert switzer. we are pending confirmation whether mr. switzer wishes to seek reappointment. we are seeking a recommendation to appoint two members to the cac. n 11 member advisory committee. item 4: recommend appointment of two members to the citizens advisory committee action* attachment enclosure the authority has an eleven-member citizens advisory committee cacc. cac members serve two-year terms. per the authority's administrative code, the plans and programs committee recommends and the authority board appoints individuals to fill any cac vacancies. neither authority staff nor the cac make any recommendations on cac appointments, but we maintain an up-to-date database of applications for cac membership. a chart with information about current cac members is attached, showing ethnicity, gender, neighborhood of residence, and affiliation. there are two vacancies on the cac requiring committee action. this vacancy results from the resignation of aaron goldsmith due to relocation and the term expiration of robert switzer. we are pending confirmation whether mr. switzer wishes to seek reappointment. we are seeking a recommendation to appoint two members to the cac. >> we currently 1234 have two vacancies from resignation of district 4 and the term of the termination of mr. roberts. nr: gould is not seeking reappointment and we are checking to see if mr. gold is interest in reappointment. we have a few interested applicants. >> we can leave it open to any applicants that would like to speak. i will leave it at 2 minutes. >> hello, my name is eric rut lig, i live in district four. my background is in environmental science and geography. i will view the authorities responsibility through an environmental lens. and work with the staff and with the board to ensure that all the projects moving forward are the most environmentally sound that they can be in the way that i see it. this is a

win win. oftentimes what is best for the environment is best for san francisco residents quality of life whether it's reducing traffic congestion. i work in san francisco land trust and i work and answer questions like where we should be preserving open and developing and redeveloping land and transportation infrastructure, regionally. the last thing i would say if selected, i will work with district 4 and the authority to go back and forth. you have to act as a liaison between both of those entities and relates community concerns to the authority and also conduct outreach on behalf of the

authority to the community. thank you for consideration my application. >> thank you, mr. rutlidge. is there anyone else who would like to speak? >> good morning, everyone. my name is michelle jock. i work at the campus of city college. good transportation directly links resources to employment, tourism and resources and education for a continued development for a better development of san francisco bay area. my educational background is public administration. i had the opportunity to work with an economic development organization in the free state province of south africa with transportation issues. i'm very excited to see a true partnership with all modes of transportation that the city and