21's effort to do more decision making and our commitment to provide safe and reliable service and recognizes our role in the plan bay area. today i want to very quickly go through what we are doing on the study, showing you what we call the limited list, which is a snapshot of high capacity transit projects that we believe merit additional analysis and give you a few next steps. we view this as an opportunity to look long term at ahead and support the region's sustain able vision of ourselves with the robust and high capacity and the high speed transit service and the plan bay area, of course, is the first sb375 regional plan that provides a blueprint for the future and we have tried to sketch out the ideas that were identified in the original rail plan and the mtc sustainability project and engagement with the key stake holders and the bart board and so the staff are considering

investment trade offs in those three categories and developing recommendations for the board consideration. this shows you bart key capitol priorities and our general outline is what we called the big three, and the state of good repair, the capacity, or the station's program and expansion, and so going back to the big three for a second and a year ago the board defined the new fleet, hayward maintenance complex and the system as the first priority and we have substantial priorities for the three projects. >> we have the number of investments of the number four of what we called the station's program. >> and so we have disstilled the remaining three investment choices and the state of good repair and capacity and expansion, and expansion in that context involves both new quarters and in-fill stations. i want to note that an expansion corridor in the bart service area may not be served by bart technology and we are

looking at a time line of 30 to 50 years for some of this, and seeking to inform the board's priority decisions and given the finite resources. there is a look at those finite resources the bart financial context is we expect the increasing shortfall over the next ten years as it looks to 2014, to 2024 and operating shortfall over that period but very significantly, we have a shortfall of about 5 billion dollars or 50 percent of the need for capitol over the next ten years. >> and as we put together this vision, effort, and we defined this flowchart here, in that context, and just described that we are trying to progress this study here. and we look at the orange box, and as expansion ideas, and we started off with over 100 expansion ideas and we reduce

this with two criteria and the free screen, land use density and available corridor and took us to about 30 projects to evaluate further, and these are reviewed with the first level or the qualitative criteria that the board directed us to use. so we now have what we call the limited list and that is about 15 expansion ideas and we are going to review the san francisco expansion ideas this morning. they same time we are preparing the expansion projects with the state of good repair and the capacity project and expect to return to the board with what we will think of as the short list and the three to five projects where we are going to ask them to advance for the study. >> these are the goals that objectives that the board directed us to use and it started with the universal big three and the economy and environment and equity and we weighted about one-third together and we noted in the service and system performance and these are bart center

concerns and those are one-third of the value over all and so we are applying these goals and the staff objectives to each advanced expansion project as well as the capacity and the state of good repair opportunities. >> this map attempts to put the state of good repair and the capacity and the expansion project on one map altogether. i have to admit that it looks much better up close. expansion are shown as the in-fill stations and they are shown in gold and these are again, very general alignments with the undefined high capacity transit and they are merely conceptual and the infill stations are the brown boxes and i want you to describe the projects that are located in san francisco. here is the limited list, and this is the result of our first level of screening, and these are not prioritized and they are numbered just to keep this straight and they are both in the stations and a column for each and, keep in mind that we

are talking about a long term vision here, maybe 30 to 50 years for some of these element and we reviewed about 30 projects with the first level screening to get to this list and we are advancing this list of 15 projects with quantitative data right now and so when we describe for you quickly just the san francisco-based projects and although we are looking at high capacity transit solutions throughout the service area and therefore, not limited to bart technology is and everything in san francisco is proposed to be a bart technology. >> okay, first we are looking at the transbay corridor and this shows a second tube. and we are looking at two options and the first will be augmented bus service but this is the transbay tube. >> bart was envisioned with the employees moving between the suburbs and the san francisco

jobs twice a day there were only 3.6 people in the bay area then, and now, we think that it is time to evaluate a second tube and we could be talking decades, and the second transbay tube could address the concerns about capacity, and system resil ans and provide an opportunity and do repair of the existing tube and the second is a regional concern and so the mtc and bart and actransit and the mta and the ta have proposed a grant to study this increasing capacity in this critical part of the region, second tube is also in the regional rail plan. >> a number of alignments could be considered, the piece under the bay and the east and the west end and we have to look at the relationship between a new tube and the existing opened y, and it would have to be designed not to putin creasing demand on the fragile y that we have for the center of our service and so this conceptual

view shows the tube south of the existing tube and the ends on the east bay are shown near the open and wide, and downtown oakland and and it serve alamena and go to the under the bay to the south of market area. >> commissioner yee? >> yeah, i just want to in regards to this study, was there any reason why you would not consider going to treasure island? >> as a possibility since we are going to increase the population there? >> we have looked at that very, very conceptually and we have concerns about the rising tides and also the length that it would, the angle at which it has been approaches san francisco, and we think south of markets is very important to serve, and we have not figured out yet, what their super preliminary have done and how we can go up to treasure island

and serve the south of market and it is not off of the table and i have shown the conceptual line and it is something that we would like to look at further, where is it under the water and where is on it the east and west end and so there is much to be evaluated in this concern. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> if we use the alignment similar to the one in the picture there, and we could go under the bay and end up at south at market and maybe we will pop up conceptually near the third and town, and serving the south of market where it is booked out and the jobs and housing are growing and it could cross under the existing market street tunnel, with want

to advance, because the repair and replacement needs for the first two and the long term relief for the downtown capacity and constraints and it is required for a network of service in san francisco. and it is endorsement and the regional rail plan and it will be required for us to consider 24-hour service. >> and a second tube is a massive advancement and technically and politically, and financially. and as a precurser we could look at increasing capacity, under the bay, with something less complex. >> could i just ask a billion dollar question, approximately what, so this is not until 2050 or beyond, but what would be the cost of that even compared

to like a high speed rail project that we are now in the midst of? >> we don't know yet, we want to actually dig deeper into the question, and try to understand things like you know, commissioner yee's question about the alignment, that would have dramatic influence on the cost. and so we need to study this further. >> but as you were saying, it is huge. >> it is. >> yeah. >> okay. >> thank you. >> related to that, the other opportunity to provide the greater service across the transbay corridor is with the best improvements and what we have shown here is ac transit and it could include, the bus only lane or lanes on the bay bridge, and the brt and improvements in oakland and the service changes in the east bay and looking at transbay terminal in san francisco and we would do this as a interim project and it will allow the bart the time to develop the con census and seek the funding for a second tube and it is

supportive of all five and it has a high level of deliverbility. this will be a future phase after the second tube would be in service, proposal bart technology and there are two routes shown, one is straight out to the richmond district and if it were across between the lake, sorry between powell street it will be a six mile alignment street to the west and secondly we looked at market street and reconnecting down at our como station and with a 9-mile stretch from downtown, and geary and the western addition and inner richmond and curving south at masonit and hitting the east side of the golden date park and the district, and it will

follow and not preclude a project with that alignment and we would like to consider this because there is high ridership with a strong habit in san francisco, and it is ununder served portion of the district and adds the service without degrading the market street and advances the bart network and it has a strong affiliation with all five of our goals. finally the only station that we are looking at in san francisco will be near 30th street and this was actually evaluated as an infill station in 2002 and included the track facility and they are obviously good transit connections in this area and there are engineering challenges because of the grades and the construction during the operation. and it also has operating issue and could actually reduce our capacity and through put. and so this project supports four goals, the environment, economicky and the customer service and it is actually hard on the system.

>> so, finalizing our next steps we intend to go to the board on the fourth for their consideration of the short list, and so the subset of the 15 that i showed you and i want to advance ask them to advance the certain projects for discussion. and i want to compare those projects against the goals and objectives. we also want to report on results of a poll that we took of the public interest and possible project and programs, and we defined the game similar to the budget czar game that was played in san francisco and we learned from that and so we were able to ask the public about projects that they would like to see and how they would like to pay for them ewhat is the budget czar game? it is interacting and engaging. >> yeah. >> executive director, that was a public out reach game that we did the san francisco plan and it was a survey where the people could spend money on

various prioritis in real time it would adjust their budgets so they could see where they are at. >> we are very impressed with the game and so we modified the concept and we had the people start with what sources of money would you like to commit to improving service, and it would be sales tax or higher bbart fares. >> could i ask to see how density would be impacted by how the lines go to the different areas and that level of understanding not only the transportation connections but also other impacts would be useful and i don't know if our, i think that there was some of that gis technology, and more of the video gamish impacts but that would be an interest to me to see how that budget czar process works and what other technology that we can use as well. >> yeah, we thought it was innovative to put together what we did and it did report back on benefits and so we looked at

air quality and congestion, and other concerns that the people would have, and equity as an example. and so it reported back immediately, so you could understand what your investments bought in terms of projects and the results in terms of benefits. >> i will just, say that on that mtc and in the meetings right there at the bart station and i know that it used to be part of china town, with a lot of affordable and low income housing and the impact on the neighbors when the bart station goes in will be of interest to me as well. >> thank you. >> so, we intend to report to the board on the recommendations for the projects to advance for the further review and that completes my presentation and i am happy to answer any questions. >> so, i don't see any from my colleagues, so the director has the comments. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, and thank you so much for being here that was excellent. i just wanted to recognize

ellen and her team's great work she and director on down with the staff have been very gracious and coordinating with us early, and engaging us, and getting input and in addition to the work that is already under way in the core of the system, and it will be embarking on a transit core capacity study to look a lot of these issues that the staff have raised i just want to highlight a couple of things. the bart investment particularly the rather ex-seeulting ones about the new tube and the extensions we looked at those in a high level in the san francisco transportation plan and just to answer your questions, commissioner mar, on a place holder basis we set about $10 billion of vin vest sxment that could be off by orders of ten of 20 percent perhaps and we just wanted to put something on the table. in addition as we wait for these prail investments to come in we expect that bart can play

a part. and you saw in the presentation a reference to the bar line and that is something that could extend beyond the transbay and perhaps going to the west side and providing the access to the west side but that is brand not certainly a reliability and we understand for the bart to extend to the bus side of the service, they really need that projection from the traffic congestion, so the coordination on the upcoming freeway corridor management study will be very key to insure that the bart can maintain the reliability if it gets into that bus business and then finally, some of these investments that may not have popped out so much but are important are the ones that are less visible and you you might see them on her slide of the map here. it is putting it here on the display and it is shown in the red circles as the turn backs

and the cross overs. and it is hard to see here, but they are in key locations, and on a preliminary basis, bart is looking and that allows bart to provide more metro but it is very complicated in terms of being operationally make that happened through a turn back or a cross over, those types of investments provide the reliability and the benefits for bart to provide the higher levels of service in the urban core and while they are not cheap they are certainly something that are cost effective in the long run and something that muni is looking at and that will be the final comment is that as bart look at its investments we want to be sure that they are coordinated through the upcoming san francisco plan with the muni rail kaiment plan as we did before, there are opportunities with the joint investment

between bart and muni as well as the transbay terminal, which is looking at not only bringing the cal train into the transbay, but potentially another sort of leg that would point across the bay. so i just wanted to insure that the board and the public that we will be looking at these together in a single system as the director mentioned. as a sing the single network. >> i just want to xhept that it is so great to get the widling down of the 100 projects down to the shorter list and to know the strategic thinking of the bart leadership and the board and i know that with nicholas, soon to join the board and the outgoing director fang that there has been attention to connecting up not only the west side, but it is also going through supervisor breed's district to supervisor farrell's district as well and so option number two of

connecting to golden gate park i am glad that is on there for the western, north part of the city and i hope as you prioritize the different projects that that consideration of the lack of really reliable transit and that could be connected with the bus rapid transit systems on that northwestern quaund rant of the city will be considered. and i was just going it say that i think that bart to the beach as one of the potential, projects, it is a catchy title, but to me, it is more bart to connect up with unconnected spots, like the inner richmond, perhaps to the masonic, and then going connecting to golden gate park and it seems like really a feasible project. i am going to do my best not to use the term bart to the beach because it might raise too many unrealistic expectations of people, and i know that for my

district in the richmond, it is not just about connecting up but also the other areas from district five to two, that also don't have that same kind of connection to the rest of the center of the core of the city. but i wanted to thank, miss smith and our director for bringing this presentation. >> public comment, anyone want to speak from the public? >> mr. labrun? >> thank you, chair mar and i appreciate the comment that you made about the san francisco tia. and you you know, believing in equity and being opened to the public. and this is what allows me to show you today. could somebody please bring up the slide on the bottom line? it is on the lap top right now. okay, so, as you know, right now, we are trying very hard to come back to the transbay terminal to the east bay and

what i would like to share with director yee, is that currently, the current thinking that we have. and so basically we coming up the transbay terminal, and we are working and this is members of the public doing this. and we are working on two alignments. and both of them end up with the bay bridge is, if you go north and to emeriville and if you take the other fork that allows the high speed rail to have the maintenance facility on third street in oakland but to go directly to commissioner yee's point, we have two alignments and we have to go under the transbay tube and that is not an issue, but the first alignment goes to the... (inaudible) we have another alignment that puts the cal

train station in the marina at the island and if you twaont see what that looks like you can go to you tube and look for (inaudible) and you will see what a beautiful station is. the technical challenge that we have, we could have the train that is stopped at a station but the current cost estimate there is around the billion and a half. and to close off on what (inaudible) mentioned the $10 million for the bart plan. >> any other public speakers in >> colleagues this was an informational item. could you please call the next item? >> item 7, major capital projects update. islais creek maintenance facility. >> and we have louis. >> good morning, commissioners, i am the direct manager over the conduct ant and authority, (inaudible) and i am joined here by david (inaudible) who is the sfmta present manager

for this creek project it is it is first rubber tire facility that mta has built in the last 60 years, it is going to serve 40 and 50 foot motor coaches and provides services for the van ness fleet. this project was envisioned in 2006 it was for 40 foot coach and later, mta agreed to also, obtain, (inaudible) requiring some of the changes and now this was in accordance with the new policy change to use the younger buses and more

capacity. at the time there was only partial funding for the project. the first phase that is completely operational, basically was for the site work and the bus storage facility and it was building a administration and acquisition, and the first two, the main building 65,000 square foot, motor coach. as i mentioned phase one is complete and the preparations for phase three are under way. and the project is out it bid and it was put to bid on october 10th and the bids are expected in december. and mta, they hope to be able to award the second, mta meeting in december. and so that they can do the notice to proceed in february and the completing date is in january, 2017. , >> i was going to thank you for taking a number of us on a tour

with our director and mr. unamen as well and it helped to see the facility but other facilities first hand and i would encourage my colleagues to try to see some of the mta facilities and how much they are in severe need of upgrades and so this is helpful as you are refreshing my memory on the visit. >> any time that any of you are interested in doing such a tour we will be happy to take you around. >> the budget is $126.8 million. it is one of the largest sfmta facility projects that is receiving prop k funds. and now, originally this project was budgeted for $67.9 million, and the increased budget is due to a combination

of factors. and a perfect storm, if you will. first you have to be agree to sign to accommodate the larger vehicles. and more equipment, and larger buildings, and then, as they were doing that, there was a change in the building code and so now that they have to also incorporate the building code, for the design. and in accordance with the city policy, the building was then conditioned as a lead gold facility and so that also increased the budget. and of course, all of this delays increased the escalation of the project. and finally, as you might have, and i am sure that you have heard, the heated construction market really put the nail on the increased cost for the project. >> page 2, is now, fully funded. and as you can see, here, the

126 million dollars, and it is available for the project. the final piece of the funding, which basically happened on the election day, it was the approval and earlier this month of the city's general obligation fund. which will provide pt 1.2 million dollars for the project. >> as far as challenge and opportunities, well, at this point, there is not any, because we are basically waiting for the bids to come in. and that is the last hurtle was the funding by the geo bond that was just approved and so that took a lot of the anxiety, for the mta. and now, with the, and because of the market is so heated right now, we don't know how the bids are going to come in. >> you were sweating prop a's passage it sounds like on election night.

>> not just for this project but for a lot of other projects too, so we will continue to work with mta and monitor the project and the subsequent construction and so if you have any questions i will be happy. >> so i see, no questions, let's open this up for public comment. >> okay. >> commissioner yee? >> just a question, i mean where is the creek? >> what street is it on? i don't know where it is, and i couldn't find it here. >> where is the creek? what street? >> the street, where is it? >> i mean, where is it located. >> it is just south of caesar chavez and right by the 280 freeway. >> okay. >> yeah. >> and you could see it from the freeway. >> any other questions? >> thank you. >> so much. let's open this up for public comment, anyone want to speak from the public? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you, so much for the great presentation. mr. stamos call the next item. >> 8, introduction of new items.

this is an information item. >> any items? >> i see none, public comment? >> anyone want to speak from the public. >> seeing none, public comment is close $ment >> call the next item. >> item ten, adjournment, thank you, since there is no further business before us, the meeting is adjourned. thank you.