those projects will layer themselves upon each other and create a spider web it effects the opportunities of the others to date understanding the impacts have on minimal. this project will look at the project holistically and in addition anticipated housing and job growth the city needs to understand the ways we'll be able to improve the environment while we're going to look at job opportunities and fund promises in the pipeline. some of the future includes barriers and they'll be discussed further but generally, you, see them from above. please not on the upper left-hand side this is the separation that was anticipated

for the high speed rail and the 16th street there's been work from the tjpa pled on the analysis and the opportunity to remove that barrier in the future. some of the other barriers are the railway areas. the goals are simple they are to determine the best methods of the construction and coordinate the improvement 69 upper environmentalist and increase job growth needs and potential revenue sources. i want to state up front it's not to do work that's completed but to assess the continued validate and in moving on to understand and built the net infrastructure. to step back a bit there's been

a lot of work completed in this area and no one, you know, is going to think otherwise we have the high speed rail and the caltrain and other plans that have been done throughout the see. i can will see see the area and understand it as a whole is imperfect to plan and not react after the fact. so what does the proposed projectile set out to complete. this is t this is the first time we'll try to study 5 components an individual downtown rail extension value engineering study, transbay terminal loop, reconfiguration or a relocation

of the 14 rail generated and the placement and that other opportunity. i want to state there is an individual one here and we understand that tjpa will be doing an additional value study and it is not ununcommonly common to have multiple studies throughout a project of this size. the contact will also aid the city sporting tjpa and caltrain's and other agency. looking specifically at each of the components the first components being the i 280 project this slide clearly shows the barrier that i 2 in the slated section is on the area i

it's a 1 point mrusz barrier two places to cross the section. the city has been really successful at taking down other boulevard the embarcadero and the obamacare takeoff and the opportunity that has come to the areas with boulevard those sections. as stated before we're building on work completed this is two options utilizing the boulevard of on slaetdz i 280. if we were able to move the elevated section we go could better improve the bicycle and transit and other transportation

areas my case mission bay but to get back to the spider web area other options for changes exist. specifically looking at the anticipated work anticipated with the boulevard component we're be looking at replacing this with a surface boulevard and making special attention to the traffic impacts to the bay bridge, the i 80 and as well as to market and obamacare takeoff. and we'll be looking at to reconnect those neighborhoods and the benefits connected with the boulevard. that second component is the value engineering study. there's been a lot of work done and this slide shows the current alignment. understanding what the current price is and understanding the

needs of the city in this area as well as other construction project worse anticipating we want to make sure we review the alignment and construction methods of connecting high speed rail and to the tjpa and see ways to reduce you costs. we would like to build on the option previously study and with any good analysis we want to make sure we said the consistent that are listed on the slide. that third component is a transbay loop track it is currently designed requiring it to reserve out reducing the capacity. previous study show a loop track to be beneficial but an earlier design is for the platform it could enhance the operation of

the tjpa and it is important it includes updating the tjpa plans and it is work out studying because of the benefits that may out weigh the potential costs associated with that. and by the additional costs of the loop we may be able to decrease costs in the area for an overall net gain. that fourth component is the reconfiguration of the rail yards it's not barrier to the neighborhood limiting access to the area. there a have been sorry we'll look at 3 options reconfiguring the areas and conducting a desk and the potential of relocating a portion of the elements within

the rail yards or a in the future relocating the railway yards >> i'm sorry to interrupt the pink is the development and the purple is the railway yards. >> this is the alignment and the pink is opportunities that exist for potential or a fees development and the purple would be the operations of caltrain's. this is work preliminary completed through caltrain's and the city understands the importance of the work for caltrain's and the operations as an efficient manner as possible is important. we'll be looking at those would be the starting points to this work. and please note that the tjpa is

requested the city of san francisco to look at the possibility of realigning the station into the right-of-way currently it's a little bit outside they building that can be done so the alignment is shown or shown in the graphic may or may not be able to be changed but that change for redevelopment is increased. so looked at that anticipated scope of work to determine the area to meet the needs and look at 9 alternative locations for additional storage and we don't believe this is going to happen overnight so as pieces of lands become available or operations can be shifted how can we take advantage of this valuable piece

of property. the fifth component as the pieces of land understandinging those place making opportunities. so as well as reevaluating the adjacent are parcels of the parcels that will be available for the other components and understanding new revenue and value capture. i wanted to point out that everybody is looking for revenue stream for caltrain and some of the other important infrastructure into the area and this potentially could provide that. as mentioned the first two benefits previously but the other four benefits and various other benefits associated but the 4 on here the generating of revenue and other capital ongoing revenues and generating

additional ridership and helping with the san francisco housing need allocations and other priority areas and helping to provide for the sea level rise. the anticipated scope of work is quite simple for the component 5 it's understanding the potential land use scenarios and specific to the zoning work. this work allows the land opportunity in the areas. as with good studies there's public involvement we're looking at the potential of 8 focus meetings we'll have an advisory committees so we'll have a technical advisory committee and they'll obey come back to various board and to provide board and commission yuptsz to provide to stakeholders.

the schedule it was released we're starting the contract in may or june phase one the the k345u7b8 investment and the next is the preliminary analysis of those alternatives and that's between december 200117th century and june of 2016. it's the end of the presentation on the railway yard studies were are there any questions >> thank you. directors any questions or comments >> well, you that first of all, i'm so pleased to see this is happening and those questions are questions we need answered.

i think none of us know if you're going to find solutions or better ways of doing things i want to say at the outset he i'm not pretending i know you're going to find anything but i think we need to look at all of this just a few comments i guess i'll offer. first and most obviously this is only going to work if you succeed at the understanding the needs of the tjpa and caltrain and high speed rail. it has to, you know, work for all those agencies any options you find so i hope the process i hope the staff of both agencies are fully and deeply engaged in the work you're doing we we end

up with something that works for all agencies. second a private the railway yards are owned by the private company with an easement by the caltrain's i hope this fully engages the private owners. i also it's not part of the scope of the study but the question of how caltrain ultimately extends to the east bay is really important and part of the - it's part of the mix of that spider web of issues you talked about and it's long been planned that would unhappy happen our section die crossing what was going to be after we get the d t x done i hope in a board level that is part of our thinking.

i'll stop there >> director lee. >> we'll move down this way. >> sure so, you know, it's also a hard topic but you progress the projects and it's hard to sort of a it feels like going backwards so in that light caltrain we have been coordinating is tjpa on the current alignment this exists it's a request but i am generally aware of the years of work that tjpa had done on the different alignments and the evaluation on the loop it would be helpful to get a presentation from staff i realize i've only joined a couple of months ago but there's a public general

understanding and it would be quiet valuable to look at what's been looked at so we build off the work that's been done we get the understanding that's role important. and then the second issue is that so with the looking at the fourth king study you know this has been a hard topic for caltrain we have to land our train somewhere and you mention there aren't if i can put this this is where the tjpa also struggles with 3 couldn't we have our facilities in 3 counties they like our train and service but not our facilities. so when we talk about relocating facilities where it goes becomes a heated decision within san francisco that's one thing but

you also have limited areas to put in transit facilities if you get outside the boundary those concerns have been discussed in various tjpa discussions. the other key thing i want to say the rail director will make a presentation on this. if the challenge of long-term vision thinking and all we want to achieve and people on this board know about shorter projects with a shorter timeframe and how do you make increment projects and now delay them. as we venture into long-term vision making i'm a planner i

think i'm in the wrong line of work but i believe we have to find the balance i think the nervousness coming out of caltrain to that agency we have aggressive schedules for immediate modernization projects and how did or does this fit in trying trying to balancing those interests are important >> thank you director lee. >> director harper. >> i'm glad to see this the city of san francisco would be extremely remiss if they weren't doing this human resources i'm revved i would have liked to seen it happen years ago because this project that we're doing was greatly energy jisz with the

prospective of high speed rail. that prospect has been severely diminished. i think we have to do this to replace that energy although i think high speed rail is coming it may not come for 25 years that's the reality. the only way to proceed with our project is to somehow do something like that with this holistic thinking that can replace that kind of energy so i think not so much, you know, trying to preserve what we're doing but to incorporate. i think this is necessary for us. this is the kind of, you know, if you want to think in terms of you know of p-3 stuff and what -

hydrahow are we going to be able to do phase 2 nothing rivals this with presenting a ponlt for being able to do that that has to be looked at holistically and i wish i luck and certainly that you can ranger for a clean blackboard and is we if we can't agree on what could happen and it's easy to bring up the politics we can't do this because of those people and those people don't like it. let's see if we can agree that on a plan of what is necessary in my prospective and you're headed that way you're thinking

in the big terms that the city of san francisco is known for and really needs to continue >> thank you director edward reiskin. >> first of all, i want to thank john ram and his staff for bringing this forward. josh stated elegantly why this work is important to the tjpa project and the city and the whole region i think it's really of critical importance. as the director harper said this is our adolescence we need to continue this afford we would be neglect if we didn't seek answers like director martin

luther said we need to find opportunity as a result of this work we would be neglected if we didn't and place the land the trains we're spending 4 to $5 million to land the trains at the transbay center that's why the work is critical. this is work we need to do i agree with some of the comments we should have done it earlier but some things that happened recently like changes in the technology and economy may have helped it's very good people don't want to delay the work we want to get caltrain's electrified and get the d t x

build but the decisions we're going to be making are going to shape the city and region for the next one hundred years. so this is the time to make sure we ask all the right questions to get the best possible land use transportation plan and strategy and ultimately projects that san francisco needs for to that end i'll finish where director martin luther started there's been a lot of great work done by the staff and consultants of the tjpa and caltrain and caltrans we're going to need outline those folks including the people too active and constructively engage in this process so it's worst our effort so we can achieve the important goals this process it

for. we as the board some direct that and strongly encourage accountability staffs so thank for bringing this forward and thanks for putting this on the agenda it's the most important work we do on the board >> are there any other comments. in fun, i have some quick questions bach because of the terminology. so the stub i understand elevated freeway is what we see and i assume the stub what makes it a stub elevated freeway >> i think john can answer it. >> it's just the end of the

freeway that's that. >> i was getting e-mails and innuendo what that meant. >> it goes in the city and it stops. >> i also want to clarify for the sake of the public i know that planning was able to go over this presentation earlier. a lot of the land value it gets confusing over the 280 and, of course, the railway yard the city doesn't own those parallels i want to clarify where we're expecting to get some of the land value, you know, to our public projects here in san francisco >> josh again that planning staff. you're correct the city doesn't necessarily own the parcels in

question and director meddling appointed the land is not caltrain but we haven't done a full investigation of the freeway corridor and there's probably still more work to be done on the railway yards themselves but should those projects be undertaken there would be have to be within win situations certainly not in the interest of caltrain's to make contracts without a gain certainly the underlying prosperity owner will have to gain as well. we'll look at the ownership stakes and what is what the pie is to be digest up and well past the end of this study we'll start to answer those questions that will carry on for some time

and hopefully, people will see the gain >> part of the answer the extent those go from under freeway parcels and the development the city can capture some value sdlo through property tax and the mechanism we normally capture. the city doesn't have to own it to capture the value mostly of our land use plans have created the fund for other improvement >> i was hoping i could talk about the proper. >> there's multiple ways to capture revenue the transit center captured additional revenue from the rezoning of the parcels and impact fees and additional community facilities

the taxes that go to tjpa project and other infrastructure. as director edward reiskin pointed out just undertaking those for example, xhooerts project would make the area is better and just like taking down did embarcadero freeway changed the waterfront helped and studies have shown it increased property values by thirty percent. there's mechldz like in the financing district or other ways to capture the broad value beyond the immediate development >> and part of the scope of the study is examining the boundary.

>> yeah. we would look at that and the whole financial economic piece that will be a major component. >> a portion of the area surrounding the freeway is the mission bay redevelopment plan we've captured a lot of the property evaluation the increment and that's one of our 3 sections how is that interaction over the long-term. >> we'll have to study that we don't have any answers yet you know through some initially exhibitions we've had some of the examinations with the landowners and there's improvement to be added and probably value to be grapd the transbay development. >> and this is it before my

comments we've gone over the plan of climate change i'm curious. >> the initial maps that have been done show that the area around mission creek is one of the most vulnerable areas and the railway yards is a low pointed out in the top grafb we need to grapple with that and protect our investment and what we should do as part of those projects to safeguard them for beyond the next one hundred years. >> that will be part of the study. >> yes. >> would i remind me again how it's being funded. >> through a p da grant and