that we don't have more of those types of businesses popping up and san francisco becomes the place if you want to open up formula retail all you have to do is call it something else thank you >> thank you, ms. beach nelson. >> good afternoon, supervisors i'm allen i'm the president of the castro valley association it's the oldest continuously operating operation established in 1978 we represent over 5 hundred members. i actually thought i was coming to talk about scott's protections but this is more about their project instead of interim controls for 18 months while the planning department goes through the reevaluation of

the formula retail. to change my preserve so it's not an hiv related organization we represent business owners so the idea this is political opposition is not factual it's about process. how much outreach did the aids health care foundation do in hate valley zero not one e-mail or phone call we've delivered over 35 hundred newsletters did they feel they needed to reach out to us no aid health care foundation has avoided the community input we're not against it we're voted by 72 percent of our membership that's coming before the planning commission this is about changing the name of the organization which mind they

post if their window still says aids health care foundation they all talk about it but it's aids health care it's formula retail they tried to change their name i gain the system so they could open up another pharmacy in the neighborhood that's not right they might have enjoyed the same level of ownership >> thank you very much is there any public comment on item one. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues could i have a motion to forward item one to the full board with positive representation as a committee report >> so moved. >> we'll take that without objection.. thank you >> madam clerk call item 2. item 2 a hearing on a transbay project >> before i turn it over to supervisor cohen i want to note

we have an overflow room in the main chambers room 12 hundred i don't know if we need it but if people are having a problem finding a place to sit they, go there. >> thank you, colleagues and folks that have turned out. this project came to my attention over a year ago when mta was in the process of finalized this prong it is based on the development for mission bay. since that time i think we ail agree there is a significant amount of completion. several residents have raised concerns and share their concerns and the mta they raised their concerns to the mta to

myself it doesn't take into account the amount of growth in the area i think we're missing an opportunity to provide better services to the dog patch neighborhood and compliment the proposed developments into the area. our goal is a hearing from a the mta and what current plans that are proposed for the project as well as i'd like to give the neighboring neighbors an opportunity to voice their concerns publicly and they have developed some alternative suggestions and i'd like to give them an opportunity to make sure we're providing the needed transportation to the south eastern neighborhoods and insuring we're providing the transportation in an equal and efficient way so the order is going to go from edward reiskin the director of the mta we'll

hear a short 10 minute presentation from (calling names) and then we'll close in. so without further ado, mr. edward reiskin thank you >> good afternoon chairperson weaning and supervisor cohen and supervisor kim members of the public i'm edward reiskin the director of the transportation with the sfmta i have a presentation and then will look forward to hearing from the public. i'll walk through and start; right right where supervisor cohen did as well that's the birthing and the genesis and the

purpose of the project and walk through the timeline and other things that were we're looking at or have looked at. so i think supervisor cohen made the point very well that there are a lot of growth coming to the city and concentrated on the northeast part of the city and also the southeast those charts are maps that were generated by the planning department for the baby boomer land use and transportation plan adapted by the region you can see graphically i realize the writing is small but interest is significant growth in the northeast part of the city. and then you zoom in look at to bayview in particular this is

the plan you can see a consideringable amount of growth that is happening and some planned we added in the proposed warriors arena that is recently been add but a pretty dense upper neighborhood that has been planned for mission bay for a long time we have to have the transportation necessary in the city i the existing needs of the city. so then specifically with regard to what we're referring to asia the transbay loop. the purchase is to construct a transit loop for the t third light rail that goes between 19 and third illinois. it's to serve the emerging job

centers in the area that we spoke about not only the job centers but the residents and the entertainment uses in the area. this loop location has always been pardon of the t third service plan including the center subway under construction it provides a short line that b will enable us to increase the trekcy more so in the areas that have the highest decent to serve the t line properly as well. so negligence of history. there is a lot of history associated with the history that dates back 20 years when the four corridors transit plan was developed in 1995 that's what gave genesis is to the program

to the van ness bus rapid transit projecting program but it was there that the third rail had it's beginning in 1998 the toolbox third project was approved and that approval included did mission bay loop so 1998 in anticipation of this development that this loop was approved. and in the sgrirm numerous different ways public vesting of this project. and obviously, the t third got split into 3 phase between a community advisory group and other groups up and down the corridor the process that went on but again to reiterate this was part of the original design of the 10 east third and the

operation of the t line. so this is a little bit more detail kind of fast forwarding to the last few years i'm sorry the type is small the points the t third first phase was in 2007. the there was a building 740 illinois and 2120 third got it's approval in 2011 because the old environmental approvals for the old mission loop we are old we refreshed those with the state and local in 2012 and file off 2013 we've finished the design you earlier this year and b will be going to the board to request

approval the contract. the point being that while the recent set of approvals were refreshed based on newer information about the transportation and housing and land use situation that we have today, the original approval for the look like was approved in 1998 before those activities happened. the loop itself would do as i mentioned it will allow trains to turn to make a loop from third to 18 and 19 and illinois it's part of the service plan for the central subway the environmental approvals limited use to daytimes and we expect those on 8 turnings per hour and

more importantly it provides the flexibility for the t line the those folks that use our light rail know we've built an inflexibility unit so some of the thinking in the 90s was to build in the flexibility so in terms of benefits the loop will significantly enable us to improve the reliability of the service along the entire t line by increasing service where it's needed and where the demand is highest to allow us to file the gaps in service to manager bifrn and again giving us the flexibility of having another place for the t train to turn.

it also will be helpful for other events or extra activities where the flexibility will enable us to better manage the service for the entire line. there is service inthat headlamp it will provide enhanced service to the entire t third corridor part of the subway is an increase the light rail flees from 71 to one hundred and 75 a significant increase the short line loop from chinatown to the loop would initially begin with the minute frequency and evolving going down to 4 minute frequency over the life of the

current fleet plan through 20 thirty. and south of mission bay the service will improve from 9 to 8 minutes so all and all through the corridor will significantly reduce the transit service that is talked about in the growth in the beginning introduction >> going back to that the short line loop will doctors from 9 in 2019 and 4 down over time. >> as we bring more vehicles into the service and the service plan has us getting down to the high frequency service from the inner and outer portion of t third.

related to other enhancements include significant improvements along the 16 controlled including the extension into this area extending the overhead system along 16 and up third for the 22 fillmore extension with the transit pedestrian safety benefits along the entire corridor so the t third is the main corridor and then the east west connection we're looking at not only from a transit prospective for counterfeiting the bike and pedestrian connections as well. and just the current project the funding for the loop the reason we're able to do it now we

secured a tiger grant a federal arrogant if the u.s. department of transportation we got a $10 million award to close the gap and enable us to move forward 16 years ago this slide shows a little bit about the grant this is something we've been doing with the full involvement of our federal parishes federal funders as well. just to anticipate one question we've heard we have a rail maintains facility about 56r blocks of the proposed loop that maintenance facility was part of the original plan for the t third light rail and a question has been raised can't we turn the train there and abandon the

existing plan to build the loop we looked at that as a request from the supervisor but this facility was not built for this purpose and it's full capacity won't have a space for the adding the turning place we've seen at the end of the line at balboa park it makes for a challenging operations and will add time and cost and is not how our service plan was built so we won't be able to meet those frequencies that were part and also have been part of the approved services. that's it in a nutshell to reiterate the main themes or messages this loop was designed to be an integral part of the

light rail service nothing has changed in regard to the need the development that is happening it's significant but laterally anticipated and this is what this line was meant to address it didn't preclude future developments of different ways to move this i didn't mention the loop was half built when the first phase on 18 and 19 so what we're doing now a number of years later just closing that circuit so in the meantime we'll have the fund thanks to the tiger grant if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them or hear the public comment and the community presentation and take questions >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you. i have a couple of questions director reiskin maybe i can talk about whether mta look ated the east facility as an alternative to the loop. >> we did and as i stateed the

distance from the current loop the need to try to run revenue service through a maintenance facility and the cost that will incur to us the incapability of the service plan it is something we've looked at another i get that from one prospective operationally it didn't work i mentioned the t third light rail service was built with the mission loop as part of it and deferred the completion of it was deferred when the project was spirit into phases one and to so this project enables us to do the funding helps us to complete the project. >> the loop today is it in the

same proposed location we're considering it considered placing it several years ago. >> yeah. nothing has changed, in fact, the rails have been in the ground since the t third was finished in 2007 so the two spurs are there we're connecting those two dead-ends that were put in place 10 years ago. >> all right. i've got a couch for questions i want to see in mta looked at the traffic issues in the area that is the major corridor for the q toshgs and to serve the park as well as the bae ship facility. >> yeah, the noticeable environmental work was done in the mid to late 80s and 90s we restarred the project we redid

some of the analysis that was required to get updated environmental approvals and it required some updated analysis as part of the environmental process we looked at the state and federal environmental laws. >> how does this takes into account the warriors stadium and pier 70. >> so this project was cleared and approved before the newest warriors arena came but my understanding is that the warriors arena from a transportation impact has lessor impacts that was approved for the land use under the mission bay improvement plan that's something we'll have to analyze and vet as part of the approvals for pier 70 and the warriors. i think if anything the mission

bay loop will help to facilitate whatever for the transportation demand those developments create >> one of the areas i'm concerned we're maybe missing at about opportunity; right? because of the federal money you need to spend it before the warriors stadium is built out; is that correct. >> we have i don't bring i don't have off the top of my head but it's 3 years from the award. >> if my memory serves me it's a missed opportunity because the money will be spent before the projects go forward i don't know if the gap is in service or in, well like i said lighting our services in the best way that's one concern i can divining can

get the information. >> i'll argue before this is before the gap is in place there is an opportunity by van this project we'll be better able to serve the location. >> can talk about the process you underwent. >> maybe i can ask one of my staff members of the details they've provided in the presentation the dates. >> i'm interested in the update that was in the previous plan. >> let me see if i have that. >> okay and i guess i'll have to get back to you, we have sxeeven documentstion that that we provided to the federal transportation the number of community meetings i don't have

that off the top of my head and unfortunately, the project manager is not available. >> no problem so the federal grant fund you've referenced in your presentation are those tied to a specific design or location. >> yes. specifically tied to this project. >> any flexibility. >> not - i guess it depends on and you mean in terms of design elements within what's been cleared through this process and the grant submission within those bonds there is but in terms of not doing the project or changing the project we secured those funds with the specific scope of previously exhausted project in mind. >> in the previous project you talked about the benefits this will bring to the overall to

system. will - but i think a lot of my comments are looking at the delays can you talk about that what would happen or not happen >> again having this loop and this kind of flexibility will only provide for improved services along the entire corridor for the higher frequency service but give us the flexibility to deal with various issues we have today on the t third to better serve the entire corridor so any flexibility will approve the service we deliver. >> which t issues can we address i know that many we will be able to address. >> crowding issues and bunching issues the things i've laid out

with the flexibility of the place to turn trains and redirection and make adjustment for service gaps those are things we generally lack. >> but the trains to redirect them into different parts of the system i'm concerned with the this accident occurred street corridor with the loops will they prevent that from happening or decrease the frequency of that happening. >> i think the overall loop frequency should decrease the need for unscheduled switch backs. as i've said near the beginning we'll be able to provide a significantly increase of service for the entire t third corridor with this loop in place which should minimize, you know, my adverse service impacts the

significant impacts to the entire third line >> okay. just a reminder we've got a 10 minute presentation but i'll give supervisor kim a moment to ask questions. >> i have a few clarifying questions so if we're constructing the loop this year i assume when will the loop start to be utilized? is that intended to be utilized with the opening of the central subway >> it will be available for service before the opening of the central subway right now the central subway for 80 for completion of december and we'll be done that this project before that so we could start using that obviously as soon as it's

done and some benefits occur immediately. >> the loop is to be constructed in the next year or construction is start. >> we haven't begun construction. >> you said parts of it were built. >> yeah. built when the light rail was done so we will be awarding a contract late summer or fall to complete that loop. i don't know offhand but the construction is in a year >> the tiger funding that's completing the construction when was that awarded. >> this was awarded in the summer of 2012. >> that's why we're on this timeframe. >> yeah. i have it in my notes the grant expires at the end of 2018 we need to get the project built and closed out the

contracts closed and the grant closed out by that time. >> if sfmta were to truly consider moving the loop down to 22nd street, i believe it's 22nd street what is that process looking at will i have this process for the bid then potentially have to go up for the grant again. >> yeah. we were going to do that we'll have to reject the grant and give back the money. >> can you explain why. >> if we were choosing not to build the loop the grant was specifically for this project we can't say offer in terms we'll use this for somewhere else but building new rails is significant we'll have to go to

the full planning design and environmental review process you, you know, generally it's in order of years so we wouldn't have this capacity it will delay us having this capacity presuming we have the capacity to do the environmental work we don't at the moment. >> looking at the numbers i agree with the density it is between chinatown and mariposa i think the numbers showcases that we recognize a lot of new development the issue more than the loop is really about the service right that's going to impact no time katrero but the bayview we've had this conversation i cannot thrill the number of people not in our district they say they're