this extension that attracts a lot of riders, and we estimate the trips on the line and that is 55 percent increase with the line, and but a quarter of those trips are new and so those are people taking autos or others means or not making the trips and remaining trips are folks coming from the over crowded lines to better balance out of system and improve the performance of the other lines up in that neighborhood. and serving out with the rider ship increase was the subway will be able to handle it and this shows that the peak element does not increase in the trips and that is due to the nature of the demand in these neighborhoods and you can see that no red or the upper red lines that is will be sufficient to support a capacity while the line is planning to run 2.5 minutes by 2030. as part of the study, to analyze the land uses and the development section of it, and so these are mature

neighborhoods with only a few soft sites in the quarter mile and really none of any size within a quarter mile to north beach, and using this analysis, our strategic economics recommended the dropt value increases. and they found several tools to be used to obtain the bonds for the project but none are going to pay for it in full and also found that with the limited number of sites, and changing the designing height limits will increase the revenue. and you can see that these tools could contribute from $10 million to $200 million from 5 to 20 percent of a project. that brings us to the capitol cost. (inaudible) who did a feasible and constructionbility repaired and each of the concepts based on a national data base but adjusted for san francisco and

these are not inflation adjusted. but these drivers of the cost of these, are the number of stations and the amount of underground verses surface construction and in the cost ranges from 400 million from the shortest route to the longest underground concept and you will also notice that they are twicing of the costs and but may notice that they are twice as fast, and so, a two way, i objectsingsing tension is estimated at about 500 million for a partial surface but about 900 million for a full underground option. and we will use that underground option as an example to see how it compares and i can see that it ranks firmly for the highest category, as defined by the fta and that is cost per trip. and so the project will be competitive to obtain federal mixed, and but there are many projects in san francisco. and so it must first find the

place in the local priorities and the match for the funds could come from a variety of sources including those valued capture mechanisms or i mean that the local transportation measure, for example, prop k, extension, and the other contributions like proceeds from the joint development of a site above the station, and may return to paul to talk about the other issues. >> north beach which is a point on phase two construction and that is where the tunnels will extend to pull the machines out without having them come out in the middle of columbus avenue and we will just keep the machines going and fortunately the environmental process has been stretched as far as it could and that was not feasible and the machines have been taken out and they do have a lease on the site through may of 2015, before any activity can go forward with construction of anything on that particular location. and we also have a right of first refusal if they are

willing to sell but we have not any indication that that will be happening. and so what this shows here is if a station were to be built here there is significant impacts to this neighborhood. and the cost to do a station initially was looked at along the other alternatives of 350 to 500 million dollars, the more expensive one will have less disruption but take longer. >> we want eded to do even though we are not going to do a recommendation and it was a simple process of 7 different categories if this probably better than average or average which will get a 0 or a plus or weak around that issue it was given a mean us and these are not weighted in any manner they are all equal, which will change if this were the valuation. and the out come, was that the two subway on the shortest

going up columbus and scored the highest and this is reasonably well, and now, all of the surface alternatives scored less and probably the reason behind that was that we are looking at issues of investment and service reliability and once it is underground and operational, and it should really not have any problems with it and, also, a disruption to the communities during the construction and operation will be less. we can go over the last slide actually. these are the next steps, this project was the blue arrow going out and it is feeding information into a transportation plan up date which is managed by the group to feed into something that mta is working on to call a capacity and which is looking at short and long term investments including upgrading and making changes to the existing system as well as

capitol investments for future con jeks and that study, is feeding into the mtc or the core capacity, for san francisco. and which is due out, later in 2015, at the beginning of 2016. >> thank you, commissioners that concludes our presentation and we are happy to answer any questions. >> colleagues any questions? >> could i just ask about that columbus avenue site that he kind of went through quickly, that was going to the theater site and it looks like the owner is preparing to build 19 units of housing but the mta have the first right of refusal, if they decide to sell, could you talk about how that impacts this proposal? >> briefly, having a large open site anywhere near a major construction site, and since north beach is a dense neighborhood, if either, the met and which is actually less

disruptive is used you will have a place to stage, somewhere in the area and having that piece of property, when someone makes the staging east and her might actually have the consultants group that makes you having a less amount of grout on the columbus and powell streets to build the actual infrastructure underground and not having another location in that area that is opened to allowing the staging will cause a disruption and will have more impact on cost. >> and the project over all? >> you can compare this to the emphasis between the china town construction site today verses the union square, construction site today, and china town is mostly off street and the road remains open, where the union street requires the road to be closed for a extensive period of time. >> and i just thank you for the thoroughness of the study, and i will have to look at the cost benefit and it seems like it is providing benefits but what strikes me is that a half

billion to 1.4 billion price tag and although there is sources of funding that you have identified, but i have questions about how it impacts the other priorities for the city as well. but thank you. >> and that is one of the next steps is looking at this in the context of san francisco's other priority and it we will be happy to keep the board informed of all of the developments. >> so i see no questions for the colleagues and open it up for public comment, we have one card, and anyone else from the public come forward to speak. >> good morning, commissioners my name is bruce agget and i am a member of the central subway group, and sf next stop.org and the board member and transportation met in the neighborhood association. on my comments today are endorsed by both groups. first, we want to thank property ject team from the mta

cta and planning department. the extension provides a complete extension of neighborhoods on the eastern side of the city from visitation valley to the fisherman's wharf and the access of prospective job applicants to jobs. the hotels room to the center to provide the capacity to meet the demand and ultimately reduces traffic con jeks and improving the pedestrian, and bike safety to transition into a more sustain able livable city. we support the next steps outlined to incorporate the datings and findings in the various places mixed in the presentation and last, berecommend that the city may be planning or the real estate

department investigate the opportunity to obtain the rights or the potential for the future locations for the samples that we just mentioned. and this is important, as the opportunities potentially exists today, which can minimize the future neighborhood disruption at the time of the construction thanks so much. >> thank you. for your support of transportation throughout the city as well. any other comments? >> thank you, and very briefly, i have yours and that could not be quite as eloquent and the only thing that i would like to take to your attention and the loop and from my experience it is a safety issue, because you have got the single down in the west in the central subway, you have two bowls and so if anything happens, you head to one of the cross passages and you head for the other tunnel and you exit. and so, as long as there is a single bowl, you should be, and you should not be studying that any further. >> thank you. >> next speaker?

>> i had no idea this was going to be on the agenda, but it just shows the support from the neighborhoods, and the people at large, that take the subway system, that are in support of the expanding this t-line and fisherman's wharf and i hope that the commissioners will take the next step from this report and move it forward. thank you. >> thank you, anyone else, like to speak for the public? >> public comment is closed. >> thank you, for this great informational item >> next item? >> 11, introduction of new items. >> so colleagues any items? >> public comment, anyone from the public that would like to speak. >> mta, just to clarify, something that i said earlier,

we are planning for a race track --. >> that is what i thought. >> okay. >> sorry. >> thank you. >> any other comments? >> public comment is closed. >> next item? >> item 12, public comment. >> we have chris wall. >> i just wanted to change the subjects a little bit. and commend commissioner yee and commissioner campos and the voters of san francisco for passing prop a&b and senior and disability people still are not riding muni for free. the aoe lks leks is over and we need to get moving on this and i know that the mta has a meet ng january that they are going to talk about it. but with he need to move this forward. seniors and disabled people need to ride muni for free.

and the voters, passed it with the mta wanted and put this on we are still suffering and the city is very expensive and thank you. >> thank you. >> any other comments? >> public comment is closed. >> next item. >> item 13, adjournment. >> meeting adjourned. . good afternoon. welcome

to our board of supervisor's meeting for for december for december 9th, 2014. >> avalos present. . >> breed present. >> campos present. >> cohen present. >> farrell present. >> supervisor kim. kim present. >> supervisor mar not present. >> president tang present. >> supervisor weiner present. >> yee present madam president you have a quoru m. >> thank you. ladies and gentlemen will you join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> the pledge of allegiance. >> >> now madam clerk are there any communications?

>> yes, madam president. we have a communication and the board is aware pursuant to the actions taken the effective resignation. >> are there any corrections to the minutes? seeing none, colleagues if there are no changes then without objection and the meeting minutes stand subject to general public comment. and madam clerk, can you please read the consent calendar? >> items one through four one through four comprise the consent calendar. >> items 1 through 4 supervisor

tang. tang aye supervisor weiner aye. supervisor yee aye. avalos aye. supervisor breed breed aye campos aye cohen aye supervisor farrell aye supervisor kim aye and mar absent there are 9 ayes. >> thank you the consent calendar passes and madam clerk, item number 5, please. >> approximately 8.1 million from reserves for fiscal year 2014 through 15 15 15 15 15 for site development. >> on item 5 tang aye. supervisor ween weiner aye

avalos aye supervisor breed breed aye campos aye supervisor cohen aye. supervisor farrell. farrell aye. supervisor kim. kim aye supervisor mar there are 10 ayes. >> the measure is adopted. >> item 6 please. >> item 6 is an ordinance to approve and authorize to execute land acquisition agreement for property located at 15 hundred at 15 hundred through 1580 mission street with an anticipated cost and the implementation of a local business enterprise utilization program and exempting the project from contracting requirements in the administrative code and approving the architect and developer. >> the item is adopted nan

under unanimously. >> item 7 please 7 please. requires the payment of prevailing wages by both the contract ors and subcontractors under the contract. >> colleagues any comment from this item. item? the item is adopted unanimously. item 8, please. >> an ordinance to amend the administrative code. chapter 14 b to codify the transfer and implementation and enforcement from the human rights commission to the city administrator and require the mayor to annually set a participation goal of not less than 40 percent and increase

the certification thresholds and increase the bid discount allowed on contracts between 10 10 thousand and 10 million to require administrative code development agreements to include a utilization plan and be subject to certain chapter 14 provisions and authorize various other changes in chapter 14 b. >> item is finally adopted unanimously. item 9 please. >> to clarify the requirement for municipal electric power service to city departments facilitates and new developments. >> same call? this item has finally passed unanimously next item please. >> .

>> this item is finally adopted unanimously item 11 please. >> to allow alcoholic beverage control type 23 small beer manufacture licenses and making environmental findings. >> this item is adopted unanimously. thank you. >> item 12 is an ordinance to amend the police codes on on on on the limitations for employment and housing. >> this item has finally passed unanimously. . >> modify the requirement for the van ness rapid transit project. >> this item is adopted unanimously. >> item 14 an ordinance to

require certain city contract ors with 20 or more employees establishing and setting forth the duties of the advisory board. >> this item has finally passed unanimously without objection. next item. >> item 15 an ordinance to revise the binding financial policy under the charter section 9.120 regarding required funding levels of the general reserve and update provisions regarding the rainy day fund. >> this item requires a two-thirds vote without objection this item finally passes unanimously. item 16. >> i'm sorry that one passes on on first reading. item 15. item 16, please. >> an ordinance to authorize

the electronic payment for parking and reduced parking ticket requirements and increase small lot exemptions and revenue control equipment requirements without objection this item passes on first reading unanimously. item 17. >> authorize the department of the environment to expand a 3 hundred a $300,000 grant for fuel vehicles in the city to to september 30th, 2016, without objection this item passes on first reading next item, please. >> item 18 the mayors office of housing of community development 443 thousand research contract grants from the irs from september september 30,

2014, to december 31, 2016. >> without objection this resolution is adopted. unanimously. >> items 19 through 21 are the resolutions authorizing the city to participate in the renewable energy programs renewable energy financing program joint powers agreement amendment and the statewide community development authority to create administrative process to accept applications and levy assessments. >> colleague in front of us today are 3 resolutions to restart green sf here in in sf it's a project that i've been working on over a year at this time and last year we had the department of the environment take the necessary steps which

is a clean energy financing program for residential properties of 4 units or less and enables homeowners and for the last year everyone involved has been working to make this program to what it is today to include a number of important components workforce opportunities and creating local jobs on local projects for our residents and competitive interest rates as well and we all believe in our green economy here in san francisco and i believe we need all options on the table to try to capitalize this revolution that's happening and we've seen

similar sonoma and and save money on monthly utility bills thousands of dollars saved annually and san francisco's leadership on this topic we have more work to do and i hope you will join me and have it up and running spring of next year which is the goal and in particular roger kim the mayor's senior environmental advisor and our department of public finance and the commission on the environment particular mr. arsa as well as my staff and with that i hope to have your support. >> thank you. colleague same house same call on this item? no objection these resolutions

are adopted. >> item 22. for a professional services agreement and design and develop install and maintain an integrated ground transportation and taxi management system between trans core pursuant to charter section . >> colleagues any discussion on this item or do we need a role call vote? supervisor campos. >> thank you this is an item that came before the budget and finance committee and it's a contract at the airport i raised concerns at the budget committee and so we'll be voting against that today. thank you. >> all right. any further comments? seeing none same house -- oh, roll call vote madam clerk. >> tang aye weiner aye yee aye

supervisor avalos avalos no supervisor breed aye supervisor campos no, supervisor cohen aye supervisor farrell aye supervisor kim kim aye supervisor mar aye. mar aye. >> there are 8 ayes and 2 2 2 noes. >> this resolution shall be adopted. >> item 23 a resolution for installation of subsurface tie backs at 923 if at 923 fulsom street development project. >> without objection this resolution is adopted. supervisor avalos. >> thank you madam clerk i'd

like to rescind the vote on item number 7. >> all right colleagues without objection. seconded by supervisor farrell without objection. >> i have continued the items from the last reading just making sure that we're aligned with our proper way we align our services for security for the mta and we'll explain the amendment. >> so the ordinance provides that the mta in its rft can require bidders to pay prevailing wages to security contract ors and currently there's no definition of a prevailing wage so a table has been submitted for inclusion into the clerk's file setting out what the prevailing wages

will be and accompanying an amendment to the ordinance that prevailing wages are those that are set forth in the clerk's file. >> okay so we can accept that amendment offered and support the underlying ordinance so clarifying the language around prevailing wage for our security contract ors for the mta. >> a second to that motion. role call vote please on item 7 on the amendment i'm sorry. >> supervisor tang aye supervisor weiner aye supervisor yee aye supervisor avalos aye supervisor breed, breed, supervisor avalos just made an amendment to item 7. breed aye supervisor campos aye

cohen aye supervisor farrell aye supervisor kim kim aye. mar aye. there are 10 ayes. >> the amendment passes and now the under lining item same house same call on that for item 7 as amendmented. as amended. we may need to do a role call vote. >> all right on the underlying item 7 7 as amended. without objection this item is passed on first reading as amended and now if we can go back to item 23 where we were i think we'll need to redo that. supervisor campos. >> motion to rescind. >> seconded by