in >> aye. >> campos. >> aye. >> kim. >> aye. >> mar >> aye. >> yee. >> aye. >> this item passes. >> thank you. >> please call item 7. >> 7, major capital projects update, and muni radio replacement project, this is an information item. >> good morning, commissioners my name is lous. and i am the project management oversight consultant and i am joined today here with mr. frank lou who is sfmta project manager for the radio project. the project will replace and modernize all of muni communication systems and some that are 40 years old and additional imp itus to the project is to vacate the 25

kilo hertz of the frequency. and it was too old to accommodate the frequency change and so replacement was the only option. and in addition to providing new communications the project will incorporate a myriad of systems and summarized of this that will enable muni to improve the operations across all modes of service and the system will also incorporate the additional base stations and included in the coverage throughout the city. here we have the project budget. at 73 million dollars in 2010, the current budget for the project is 116.4 million dollars in years of expenditure and this increase, is mostly due to receiving only one bid. and this is very specialized, and only a few companies in the country have the capabilities to perform it. and in addition, at the time that there were many across the country undertaking similar

projects due to the mandated fcc deadline. and after protected the negotiations that took over a year, the mta board authorized an award to the harris corporation in the amount of $109.2 million which included 86.6 for base, and some for optional services and the optional services some of them were subsequently executed once they secured additional funding. expenditures equal 8.84 million. >> could i just ask you to just explain in every day terms how this will have a day-to-day impact on riders and how it will impact the servers and how it is going to help the system. >> just, well, it will help by facilitating and making more

intelligently, and by having basically until the transportation systems and so, knowing what the vehicles are, and it will allow them to better do the forecast for arrivals and departures and also, be more in communication with the operators, and more systems for the vehicle and live as the vehicle is being driven and they will be able to diagnostic and to figure out what is going on with the vehicle if there are any problems or whatever. and also, for helping with incidents if there is an incident and to be able to manage them better and get the system back on track again. >> thank you.

>> so, with the 6 to 1.8 million dollar contribution, it is the largest funding source for the project and allocations made in 2007 and 2009, and however of the 18.4 million dollars expended today, only a (inaudible) and there are reasons for this. and the first one, of course is that the three year delay that happened. and the separate one which is an interesting one is the type of contract, and instead of looking at payments and just the most common way of contracting for construction, and muni was able to negotiate and a milestone based contract and where the contractor is paid on the quauters with the schedule and only when that milestone is reached, then the payment is made. there is no monthly payments and therefore, muni, is able to allow payments later, and in the process. and finally, afmta has been

using other grants with earlier expiration dates and the authority policy that the other funds be used first whenever possible. up here we have the major milestones for the project. and in the accordance with the design, the final day is october of 2015, as we mentioned earlier that is three years later anticipated. and now the 2012 completing date in 2009, was arbitrary mandated by the fcc which wanted to work with the frequency. and this deadline was later reskinneded when the fcc realize that had most properties will not be able to meet it and as a matter of fact, the change is no longer

required. harris corporation is to be the contractor and they received the proceeding in june of 2012. and harris is one of the most important communications consultant in the country, and it is the main communication contractors for the u.s. armed forces where they have provided 70 percent of all communications for all branches of service. and the project is not reaching the greater milestone and the package has been completed and it is under review and they expect the completing in june. and final design. and in that application of the department is also under way and in january the construction in the tunnel of the total also commenced. the enterprise goal of 15 percent, and to date, there have been no payments because their scope is concentrated in the construction phase and so

they have not gotten to the part where the sbs are going to be participating the challenges of the project and the main challenge is that the project is behind because of what i explained earlier and this means that the portions of the control cannot be fully operational until the project is completed. and sfmta and harris, they both have last year, assigned more senior project managers. and as recognition of this project and over the next year or two, we will be monitoring very closely this project, and provide our assistance and support whenever possible. >> and that concludes my presentation. and i have to answer your questions and like i said, mr. frank lou is here also. thank you. >> any questions from the

colleagues? >> so i see none, let's open this up for public comment. >> is there anyone that would like to speak? >> public comment is closed. >> colleagues, if there are no questions, less have a roll call. >> this is an information it el. >> so it is an information item. >> okay. >> so, thank you, mr. surnaga. >> let's call the next item? >> 8, san francisco municipal transportation agency capitol improvement update and this is an information item. >> and we have miss lumbarda >> and the introduction to have it for the city here, and as you probably know is we are going to present on only the second capitol improvement program done by the mta and it is a very important planning document, for the mta in a timing for us is absolutely excellent and what you will see in jonathan's presentation is within the program which covers fiscal year, 2015, through 2019

and mta makes assumptions about local funding sources that it controls, and other discretionary sources in terms of what it can put funds and deliver in the next five years and it is capitol program and it is distinct from the operating budget and this seats very nicely into our prop k priority that will cover the same period and come back to you for approval and because the authority board is our responsibility and to approve the plan and to approve the criteria and actually assign the funding to the specific projects in each of the 22 categories and so as jonathan describes as the massive process and just keep in mind that what the mta does is make the assumptions about the revenues and that the other funding entities will actually program the funds to the pro-yekt and set this up nicely and welcome jonathan and give you a quick presentation. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> and i want to thank you

chair mar for giving us the opportunity to present this to plans and programs. >> i am with the transportation agency, and as maria noted we are going to be covering a quick presentation on our five year capital improvement program. just really quick i will just go some highlights on the mta to kind of understand where we are coming from, just an overview of the capitol infrastructure and this is a slide that we actually show all of the public groups and we present this to and give the good perspective and overview of the five year cip and what is exactly being proposed over the next five years. and so just really quickly, a lot of our bases in the decisions that we make are based on our sfmta plan that goes to the fiscal year, 2008 and our vision is the san francisco great city and excellent transportation choices and of course our number one goal is to focus on the greater transportation system for everybody and trying to make the non auto modes and focusing on the environment and

having the outstanding service for our customers. and just we would like to tell people that about the things that the mta does, for the people here, in the city and county of san francisco and for those that like to visit, and one thing that we do operate over 1,000 transit vehicles that travel 24.4 million miles a year on the road. and the earth is only 24,000 miles around and so that really gives you perspective of how many miles our vehicles are running and of course you see other things like our 281,000 street signs, 208 miles of bike paths and 40 off street garages and a lot of infrastructure that we provide to everyone. >> just our capitol infrastructure, we have the bus and trolly coaches that we are sfonsible for maintaining and 217 miles of your overhead trolly wire throughout san francisco. and 27,000 parking meters that we have, that are responsible

for replacing and 40 cable cars and if you didn't know, we actually build those ourselves on a five year cycle, we have the shop that does that. and all of the tracks, the subway stations, and then, 3,000 bicycle racks and we will be adding a lot more in the years to xom, just give you a sense of the infrastructure. >> what is the five year program? well, this is, as maria noted the seconds five year capitol program and to get across to all of you why we have it, in the world of transportation, we have very large projects that all of you deal with every day and sometimes when we talk about the planning and the funding of those projects those can take a long period of time ten to 20 years and we figured out the projects such as the m line and the projects that we are talking about on the 19th avenue and the projects of that scale and but we also have the shorter term that the mta is responsible for and something as small as a $15,000 bike rack project and so we have the extreme scales from the very small to the very large and the

prior to 2012, we have done was a ten year capitol investment plan and that included everything that we planned on doing, meaning intentioned on doing and what the needs were and plus the funding that we thought would be available and what constantly showed people is that we had massive gaps that we could not close and so what we found was the members of the community had very little sense of what the mta would actually deliver and like with the funds that you have, what can i actually see be delivered on the streets of san francisco? >> and so what we did was, we split up that ten year investment plan into our 20 year, unconstrained capitol plan which has the needs over 20 years, and the five year capitol improvement wham that is restricted to the revenues. and so with that, the five year cip is a financially constrained, program of projects and so what we do and what we started last august is that we look at every funding source that we intend to getting within the five year period and we are honestly very

conservative about those sources and so we typically think that we will get more than we project and we project a very conservative level because we don't want to assure someone that we are going to move forward with the project and not have the dollars in place, it is a tool and so we do fund the projects by phase so that the people can get a sense of when the things will start and end and it is implements a lot of the plans that you hear us talk about and the pedestrian strategies and the bike strategy and the fleet plan and other plans and strategies that we have at the mta and we also do not want the funding and acceptability to be a barrier to the projects happening and reason that we are conservative in the estimates is that we don't want to plan to do a projector do the construction documents or come to a day where the lack of funding prevents it from being delivered and slowly but surely we are trying to build up a reserve so when the uncertainties do occur and we just heard one example with the

radio project and they have the financial capacity to have that project continue on schedule and be delivered as scoped. >> and so with that, we are going to cover this as a very nice slide and it shows how over all, our five year capitol improvement program works and so there are two thresholds to be added and one is that it was part of some sort of a plan or plan process, or the strategy, that had the public input. and so it should not be something that a project something that no one has heard from, it should be implementing something that was promised at a policy level to the people of san francisco and so you will see those things listed and there is the plan and the capitol plan and the various strategies and the decision zero was listed there and also, i know that a number of you have expressed the interest in this and we have made commitments to the area plans that were approved by theed abouter of supervisor and we take that into account when it comes to what projects will be proposed in the five year period and with that we have

the priority and if we cannot find within the five year window, 90 percent of the funding, to be able to deliver, either on that phase, or move the project forward it is not listed and again, because we want to give the public a real sense of what actually can be delivered to them in the next five years and from there, as has been noted it leads into the other documents and plans, and mtc's capitol transit capitol priorities where we project the bus replacement needs and the funding for our infrastructure and the competitive grant proposals and we do project the grants and so we start and maria like to remind us of constantly creating that pipeline of projects and maybe a year or two ahead and the competitive project and the development impact fees and the five year prioritization programs. and so with that, i think that i went, backwards. on february 4th, these list of

policy priorities were presented to the mta board and they were extremely supportive and so these were kind of the over arching policy goals that we had for this five year cip and we do at the mta have a policy, to insure that we keep our systems in a state of good repair and we have developed minimum thresholds for funding and right now, our transit critical assets meaning those things that provide direct service for the public, or the access that we replace and for us to be able to do that in a timely manner, requires 250 million a year and the goal to meet that minimum threshold year over year and within that five year cip we are proposing a full, complete replacement of the entire fleet and so by the year, 2019, all of the rubber tire fleet, it would have been replaced. and but, we are looking to increase our traffic signal replacement program and double it from our base line, in the

past because we are running about a 90 plus year replacement cycle and we we need to find the funding. and the program and i know that is discussed in the plans and programs and it has been a priority and so we can make sure that our vehicles are reliable in providing service and then, of course, our facility needs are extreme and even in the five year cip we are not able to meet all of the need but we are doing our best to replace and modernize the facilities and the streets, of course, walk first and the vision zero and moving forward and then i know, plans and programs, and then the transportation authority, and the cec has been asking about our backlog in traffic calming projects and we are proposing in the five year cip to clear the backlog and fully fund all of the projects that are outstanding and of course, the travel time and reliability and things like the tep and funding portions of market street over the next five years and working towards expanding the fleet for the roads that are going to be happening in san francisco.

>> you are funding them and we want to know that you have the capability and ability to do all of that and so a couple of things that we did in the prior cip and we are refining and working on and is first in the prior, we worked to funding the projects by phase. and the reason that we did that, is if the project a, comes up and we know that the estimate without really doing any work is 20 million dollars, we want to start on that. we want to initiate it. and so, if the planning phase for that project, are designed as 50,000 to one million dollars, we should not wait for the 20 million to be there to start to do something. and so, funding projects to phase and moving forward, we want to move to more accurate cash flow and so that we can advance them quicker. and so as an example. you for example, you have a $500,000 that will take a year and if we can get the money up

front the staff can begin. >> and could i just ask about one of the ongoing frustrating projects that van ness, brt and the geary brts and just talk about the delivery plans for those projects in the bigger picture of kind of this proposal? >> and just to quickly answer that question, and so there are two projects, and the brt and the geary brt, and as the committee knows, we are completing the environmental phase on geary and we are working through the five y pp and identifying different federal sources that might be able to fully fund the construction phase of that. and i think that through the fiscal year, 2019, we are looking to try to fund as much as possible, the details of the design phase and so again, perfect, question, and chair mar, if we can fully fund the detail phase and it makes it attractive to federal sources that will be upcoming to the core capacity and small starts and federal funds and that

will make the project as ready as possible and as attractive to possible to the various state and federal sources that will be upcoming in the next five years. in regard to van ness, as many of you know there have been the discussions about a cost increase from the project from the original 125 million dollar base, and we are still working on it. they are causing the increase, to change from day-to-day, and the current recommendation in the five year cip is that we would take the mta's only revenue bond to close the gap to be sure that full construction can happen and because that the project that is in the detail design now we have made the commitments to the government and to you as the authority with regard to prop k. and we are looking to close the cap, the anticipated gap with our own revenue bonds and counting either on a continued good market for us to finance against. and so being a little less conservative and be able to bring in more revenue bonds or

hoping that there is savings on some other projects two or three years out where we will take the funding from those and close the gap on van ness. >> thank you. >> and so, second accountability, in delivering, we do have our capitol programs, control system in place, and we are now putting all of our street related projects on the sustain able streets that is working on into that system and we are beginning this month where we are looking at actual spending and delivery and this cip, one of the pieces of feedback that we got internal from the city and they want to know what the milestones are and what the base lines are, and so we will set the base lines and the project coordination and integration and i know as a board of supervisors. >> i have a question. >> thank you, i am going to have to leave, shortly, but i was wondering if you or the cta, or the transportation authority staff could respond

to this and i think that especially since we are talking about going to the ballot and asking for more resources, i am wondering if you could maybe we could schedule a progress report, on the performance audit that was actually funded by the county transportation authority and just for the purposes of for the benefit of the people who are not here at the time that this came out in 2011, some of the findings, in that performance audit that specifically in the second phase looked at how muni was handling and managing capitol projects and they were very disturbing and so if found that you see here, that many of the projects were actually that five to ten percent over all savings could be had by the mta, and it would actually manage its projects better and look at 29 projects and putting aside the central sublt and looking at the project and how

they are being managed total budget of 189 million for those projects and those projects have gone over budget by 90 million. not only that, but projects were on average 592 days late. and in terms of project delivery. and so, i think i would like to know how we are doing compared to what the management audit found, because it is no too long ago that this came out and so do you have any thoughts in terms of, you know, is there a progress report that can be provided in terms of how you are doing? >> yeah, i think that we can absolutely provide a progress report and i know when that audit was presented to you we did provide the responses as to how we were going to do that and i think that we could provide a progress report on the same recommendations and milestones, we are happy to do that. >> if i would ask the director, have we requested a progress report and do we have an

opinion on whether or not the mta has addressed all of the recommendations that were made in the performance audit. >> sure. commissioner campos, executive director, we have not requested an update and it is certainly timely and it would be a good thing to do i believe and i think that this effort that you are seeing is a deep effort in the sfmta to address the fundamental issues and i think that under lay many of the findings of that controller's report or the audit that was done a few years ago and so my sense is that they are working on it, commissioner campos. and that this effort is a pretty deep effort at sfmta to look at the systems and the practice and really the culture of the project management and delivery but i think that it is timely to infight mta to come back and provide that report. >> do you know from the time that the audit came out, has there been an ongoing discussion about whether or not the recommendations of the audit or performance audit have been implemented? >> we have talked about many die mentions of it and certainly there is an ongoing

discussion about the project delivery in general and about the capitol planning and the systems and the practices that sfmta and it has been happening at their board to their planning process at the staff level, it seems to be happening more and more, and at the program level and in addition to the project level, but i think that there is a lot of work under way and there is a ways to go but they are working on it is my sense. >> and finally, if we wanted to have a hearing on this, to have a report, how long do you think before we could do that? >> after the break. >> yeah, let's come back to you in the next month. perhaps with a schedule if not the actual hearing. >> because this especially, if we are going to ask the voters for more money, we need to show that we have actually addressed a lot of the problems that were identified in the management audit. >> that is great. thank you. >> thank you. >> great question, thank you very much. >> so, just to follow up, so accountability and delivery and so getting that system together which was one of the

recommendations in that audit. and so we have got our transit related projects in the system and now we are moving the street related projects and the next two bullets the review and the cost estimating base line projects so that we can measure our performance over time and look at those 500 days and not have a consultant do it and know where we are having the problems and we need to focus the resources to deal with that. and working with the dpw on following the pavings and we think that is a successful program and something that should be ongoing and continued the project integration and communication and out reach with something that would really change this time around and choose quickly, here is a summary. kind of a high level graphic showing the differences and our first five years cip was 2.5 billion, and you will see that a large portion of it was made up by the central subway project. and the green represents our street related capitol programs, and yellow transit opt malization and those would include the brt and the other large transit type of projects

and the red represents the state of good repair, and the two symbols there, one represents the fixed guide way and the other one fleet and you will see the proposed cip for the next five years and increases to 3.4 billion and you will see the central portion of that is reduced because we will bring in the last portions of revenue to complete that project and you will see that the street related capitol programs have increased 178 percent which was the largest increase, and 63 percent for transit and expansion and then, not so much a percentage increase, but larger component of our cip, is staying in good repair and largely that is reflected because of that fleet chunk and the replacement of our fleet that is reflected there. to the right, you will see the revenue sources and we would like to tell the people this, and so our capitol improvement program is made up of 30 plus different sources and you are one of the different sources and each one of those groups have a different set of rules of how those dollars should be

used and i would like to mention that so that the people can understand the complexity and that will make-up 2 billion and you will see the subway at the top and you will see ttf there which are proposed november ballot initiatives and so within the five year window, we are estimated 500 million coming in for projects within this period. and those revenue measures will generate more than that over the period of which they are planned and so this just looks at the revenue that we expect within the five year period and you will see the portion of contribution that they make. >> just this is the interesting slide, so again, it shows the break out of spending, but for the first time, because we do include that ballot initiative funds for the purposes of planning, it makes the majority of our funds come from local sources. where typically at the mta the majority of the sources would have been federal and so this is the first time that we have been in that situation and you can see that the state contributions are shrinking and a large part is the proposition

one b which was the procedure transportation bond that is coming to an end and we have not included in here, because we do we are very conservative and we have not included the funds related to cap and trade and we do suspect that we will be getting the cap and trade funds through the commission and we do not yet know what year so it was impossible for us to tie it to a project and so we are not sure quite yet when we will get it. just quickly to cover some of the proposed improvements. >> do you know what the amount the range for that cap and trade money will be and that will be in the state here. >> it will be in the state sliver and it will be between 450 and 500 million dollars. >> okay. >> so, quickly i wanted to highlight the bicycle improvements that we are proposing for implementing the bike strategy as planned and so the bike parking