found that frankly not a lot of people want to bid this in terms of meeting the federal requirements we prepared the analysis because that project cost was something we wanted to see if we could lower and minimize the risk of construction and frankly, we've done just that we went to the analysis study that exclude the contractors as well as engineering experts they are recommendation to shift hillcrest road to the north and frankly push the roads into the hillside and build a tiered retaining wall this will approve the retrofitting and tida it will require additional jerry

and an environmental analysis but the good news we over all project cost lore we see it $66 million and we believe that the contracting community will be very anxious more of the contracts to bid the job just the pictures here show what's in right the shifting to the north this is a cross section showing where in essence we're going to build one bridge out of the 3 by shifting the roads into the hillside more retaining walls thirty to 50 feet high at this point. >> this is a breakdown of the cost overall for the project those basically are separate bridges in essence we're taking 8 bridges and working with the state in terms of funding for

each bridge individually and basically at the power point we have the fund and we're working with the future allocations for the major phase money and finally this is a breakdown of the federal funding $58 million plus from the federal 6 point one from prop b with the tida match approximately $3. million plus toy above extended $6.3 million on the engineering services and the environmental work also happy to report we're actually right now meeting the goal and take into account about a 14 percent for the are interim work we do schedule that lies ahead is to go ahead and perform the additional environmental analysis that is what we call

the new va alternative should be completed by march of 2016 and the at the end of 2016 to go ahead and start construction in march of 2017 to the important to needed we'll not start construction on the west side until the east side is done also conflicts reconstruction of the down and off-ramps on the east side of the island those ramps have been closed for a long time some folks may not remember they're there we'll complete by the spring of ri so we'll start in 2015. >> feinstein i've indicated challenges meantime you want to reopen documentation it is important to go ahead and do so and meet all the requirements of ceqa

san francisco puc is as busy as any agency they've been in their lifetime we want to make sure we gave me them early with the waterlines project and starting to evaluate alternative construction delivery methods that we'll see whether or not their feasible and bring to the committees and board in the future we learned add lesson on the ramp project is that the birds don't know what month of year when it's warm they start nest so we envision an early contract on the contract that was a delay because of bird nest issues that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you for you thorough

presentation. >> commissioner christensen. >> i was occurs about the aesthetic and environmental impacts of the two choices we're certainly seeking in the presidio a modern preference for low profile and integrated roadways so up until the parrot of retaining walls i was thinking the preferred approach would have visible and environmental improvements what happens to the sizeable retaining wall. >> the virtual impact analysis will be the key document we've prepare i'll envision there will be aesthetic treatments we'll have to implement has part of the project and caltrain has done similar retaining wall work on the one side of the island

and match the topographic. >> any other questions seeing none and i think tilly chang. >> i want to thank our folks and the entire yerba buena team this project a complex and in addition to managing the top graph and the actual job they've been able to corridor with the other promotions tida and others in the first phase of yerba buena housing and in addition the caltrain is taking down the bay bridge and we are coordinating with eric mentioned the mta and reporting with the touchdown of the bike and

pedestrians later this year i was pleased when a job like this is complicated and even in the middle of the night i want to commend them for a job well done we were on time and budget and continue to be on the budget. >> thank you and seeing no more comments from the commissioners all right. opening it up for public comment this was an informational item and next. >> informational item introduction of new items. >> seeing none we'll proceeded to general public comment any members of the public want to comment seeing none, public comment is closed. next item, please. >> item 12 adjournment. >> thank you. this meeting is now adjourned .

>> good morning today is february 10, 2015 welcome to the san francisco transportation authority finance committee of the transportation authority i'm supervisor avalos and the clerk is steve item one roll call vote. >> supervisor avalos supervisor campos supervisor cohen supervisor kim supervisor mar absent

we have quorum. >> great we have quorum on to the next item. >> consent calendar items 2 to 3 those items are considered route and staff is to the required to present if anyone objects they can be removed. >> colleagues questions or comments on item two to three arrest public comment for those two items public comment is on on the consent calendar and seeing no members of the public come forward we'll close public comment and have a roll call vote for our meeting minutes. >> supervisor avalos. >> oh, i'm sorry oh and supervisor avalos. >> supervisor campos supervisor cohen supervisor kim supervisor mar absent consent calendar passes. >> very good the items passes

on to the next item and item 4 federal and state update on action item. >> great, thank you good morning chairman and members happy to be here i have a brief presentation on one particular bill we're recommending the masking support we're taking a recommendation i wasn't planning on covering those and couple of other things to update you on transpiring no sacramento. >> you want to identify user. >> i'm mark watts recommending the transportation board in sacramento. >> ab one 94 on page 4 of our masking mr. the gentleman is the chair he introduced this is as the rerequest from the coalition

pardons to the and hot lay currently treasures a statute that the authority the statute is not effective a new sunset date has expired that rethat status and defines the regional definition for the san francisco bay area that authority resides with the m t c and must excludes the requirement they must consultant with the county jurisdiction in which the proposed project is located this is similar to legislation that emerged last summer that failed passage about had quite strong support if the coalition as well as the administration quietly behind the scenes we've run into

a chairman of the committee that was opted to tow so that bill state we're recommending a support position the requirement for regional agency with the loophole transportation authority parole needs for strengthening we've been working on that we would like to have our endorsement to support this measure so we're folding that b 2, 3, 4 with our self-help county coalition. >> great supervisor kim. >> thank you. can you explain specifically how this would impact the specific hotlines here in the bay area how this legislation. >> yeah. so the authority would be grant to m t c so let's yeah. let's take their h o v system

they'll be required to approach the state transportation system inform approval to proceed with that approval is the imposing of tolls for the hot lanes. >> i'm sorry it this for the existing hot lanes it's preliminary our golden gate bridge i guess a specific example would be helpful. >> it's intended to authorize the conversion of current h o v lanes to potential 84 lanes and go beyond that to construct additional hot lanes. >> giving me an example of that i'm sorry. >> thank you tilly change through the chair supervisor kim

that state legislation will authorize the entire state for the express lane development in san francisco we have expresses lanes in alameda on the 580 and here in our san francisco in our part of the networked we have no carpool lanes touching san francisco the as far as i am concerned, first is to establish hot lanes and there after consider the express lanes if you have enough capacity in the carpool lanes you'll offer that to yellow drivers who will be willing to pay a fee to enter the lane in our district it the golden gate and the 280 and 101 to the south and freeway management study to look at the carpools and eventually go potentially express lanes.

>> this is exciting so this something we'll around the downtown congestion that sfmta has been exploring our office so we'll be putting i know you've mentioned h o v lanes with the 101 and 280 we have h o v lanes. >> we have one that's it no other facility on that on ramps. >> that will give us the discretion to increase the number of - >> yee correct the nuance is this is a new approach to managing froidz ochltd it requires a strong partnership between the state and sclts that owns the facility and the designated operator to operator and the local government both our agency sfmta and others will be heavily involved with a new

concept for the public to understand. >> this is important i think with all the growth with employment and residential we're seeing the congestion impacts on the south of market to having that capacity to implement more of those on the 101 and 280. >> you know who our representatives m t c i'll suggest we have further dialog with our counterparts with san mateo and st. clair are interested in seeing we have a facility and stakeholder outreach to the business community and the employers and residents are seeing strong demand for the express lane development as well. >> thank you for the explanation. >> i apologize for not being able to directly answer our questions. >> just quickly last year

assembly speaker tony shublg shock up the transportation community by interrogating a new concept with splult the state and local highway system essentially she called on a series of steps to be undertaken the bill was not drafted but has in mind what the transportation wonder world is pleased with the leader of the assembly move forward essential they'll recapture fund to balance the general fund the truck way fees are paying for the transportation bonds so her measure will contemplate freeing up one million dollars into highways and back to the general fund by encompass a new fund

that raise one billion dollars 8 so the net program will be about close to 2 employed and the general fund will be held harmless this is a navel first step i don't know how it will be particularly when we see the los angeles's we'll be bringing back before you. >> just a cautionary note speaking of language we have to when we're talking about impacting those taxes legislation imposing puts people against something but impacting a new license fee or a user fee that is the way we want to discuss implementing them versus taking a personal responsibility

versus the burden that the right is using to try to make sure that people don't want to raise taxes or increase the government spending that improves our lives. >> i'll take that to heart thank you very much. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you mr. chairman and the presentation i want to ask you about ab 61 which is a bill by a i guess mr. allen that was basically how private shourlt services like the you know so-called google buses and textbook buses to use basically bus stops the same way that school bus and i'm just very concerned about this bill and

one question - well, first of all, i'm wondering what we're doing in terms of of that bill i think it would be important for us to take a position against this bill but one question i have is would this bill actually supersede the pilot that san francisco has? the way i read it it will not it will allow only ann on a volunteer y basis they enter into the agreement so the agency 2, 3, 4 my reading provide that assess they wouldn't be compelled to be >> i would certainly make a motion that we take up a formal position opposing this bill. >> just a followup question would ab 61 is there any language that prevents local

control in terms of setting up a fee for using our - >> it's a sketchy bill no restriction on fees or direction as i read it for an imposition of fees i've been in touch with the office in case they're making expansions or clarifications so you think the eater will be in late march i think if you're considering taking an opted position at this point in time that will give me time to work on your behalf on the measure in sacramento. >> for me the main issue is it is the privatization of public space allowing those private companies to use public space without requiring any kind of payment obviously led it up to the jurisdiction but it is

dangerous to at the time set this precedence that's the problem with the pilot if they could do that in san francisco it about be the show will be taken on the road, if you will. >> i understand. >> this year's nothing that the bill that gives away any of our assets. >> that's what i can see. >> thank you so is and a motion so i second that. >> before we - we will w we'll have a public comment and presentation. >> the only last thing when the governor announced his budget he highlighted the need for the protective you are to work with him for supplemental fund and

bryan kelly who has been conducting 2 years successfully a workshop on different aspects of funding in sacramento and the different aspects of managing transportation called an initial meeting called the california structure proprietor workshop and the purpose was to be underway with the governors first step of outreach through the secretary so there's not a lot of development but a scene setting meeting we're starting to see a framework that the governor might want to work in its early to share that pubically we'll be involved with the process and keep you appraised so if you take a step back you'll see the leadership in the assembly that is addressing transportation and

looking at the road and administration is stepping up and the senate won't are far behind. >> thank you that concludes my presentation. >> still waiting for the federal government to do it's part it's a tough time i expect to be able to by the people we keep on vicinity new enemies all the time. >> a question. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i having had one more question on ab 24 and i was wondering if there's information beyond the summary in the legislative round up for the requirement for the liability insurance for the f t and we're waiting for them to

address ailed language that has not come out yet. >> i'm very interested as the legislation develops it is certainly an issue with one of our fte drivers killed a pedestrian and it was an insurance fight i'm interested in seeing how the bill will be developed at the state level. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> tilly chang really it is quite exciting to see so much action we'll we're going to see the puddle you've selected and in addition driving vehicles regulations from the dmv shortly and the performance of the ceqa type of performance there's a lot of going on at the state level i appreciate mark keeping

track we had a visit from our federal agency mr. fox he visit good looking and mother-in-law view and attended along with a number of people from the san francisco's and your director of transportation bryan kelly was talking about the state of our system transportation unfortunately, the news was grim we're from a state of criticized with our international structure this is as supervisor avalos pointed out we've invested in our from to begin a national dialog will the state transportation we have a highway trust fund heading into the red and funded inadequately by the federal gas tax it funded not only highways but surface transportation across the modes

and bicycling as well as and the pedestrian involvements investment so we rang the bell and called on everyone to paying attention e pay attention and particle with the new dialog in washington and congress to recognize this is a bipartisanship issue with the labor groups calling on congress to move for the funding for transportation by 20 thirty we're expecting to see 40 percent of the population in upper in his places this is wherewith he have sustainable global and social equitable development we want to make sure that particularly where we have older transit systems like in san francisco with our muni is over one hundred years old we're

or partnering and supporting what ever way we can meanwhile we're not witting we're seeing experimentation secretary fox talked about that over 2 dozen states are raised their own state gas tax we have not done that we're looking at this thing meanwhile as mark mentioned looking at a stating fee program the program that is based on what oregon and washington have done and we have cap & trade so we're seeing carbon based fuel that is generating revenue for transportation it isn't enough the lack of federal violation was a little bit disappointing we've seen commitment on the issue but not time and didn't what can the