>> supervisor peskin: good morning. welcome to the transportation authority meeting for tuesday 13th 2018. alberto, could you call the roll please. (roll call) >> supervisor peskin: could you please call the next item? >> item two, an information item citizens advisory report. >> good morning chair peskin and vice chair tang and members of

the transportation authority. i will be presenting the report today. starting with item five on the agenda, approval for allocation of appropriation of prop-k funds, but there were concerns about the lack of lighting on bayshore, cesar chavez, potreto and if the project budget could be increased. there was discussion about the muni tracks that fit the market being in poor condition and the bart grades presenting a hazard as well that inquires course coordination with bart to remedy. with regard to item 6, the approval of the expenditure for clean air program, in particular appreciate the c02 reduction

even though it's not criteria for the chief sca. a major item of discussion related to an item that may be coming before you at your upcoming february 27th meeting, the quint gerald connection road. there was concern over the lack of communication of the pacific railway right of way land to be the proposed road in the bayview. it was observed that the buyer of the property, trans metro, providing shuttle bus services is not acting as a good civic partner but perhaps taking advantage of opportunity and bad faith on the part of the railroad to secure land designated by the project and is in position to receive a better situated parcel in exchange. a realern and was raised by other lands identified. potentially benefitting in the

same way at the public's expense. a feeling was expressed that if it weren't in the bayview neighborhood, this purchase would have gotten more attention and action and now the berm blocking the street will result in a final price tag to reconnect quint street which will be more than the long bridge for the train station not originally pursued because of the higher cost but that kept the street intact. aut as a possible solution, the board of supervisors with imminent domain. a thorough fair connecting the community. the cac requested regular updates on the issue. lastly, a report was heard about transportation network companies

in california and nationwide. the cac echoed chief peskin's concern that cal puc is not sharing information on fees and observed that the cpuc fees imposed were too low and if necessary to pursue legislation to allow local entities to levy fees as the communities most directed impacted by the vehicles. that concludes my report. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you mr. larson and congratulations on becoming the chair of the cac. any public comment on item 2? >> good morning commissioners. i'm the district 10 representative on the cac. i would like to thank mr. larson for his extensive rundown of the bridge comments that were made at our meeting. i look forward to two weeks from

now at the board meeting and i would like to thank my constituents in district 10 and everybody on the board of cac for the last four years as chair. i don't step down lightly. i recently got a new job that requires i travel a lot, so took the -- took myself off of the election last month. and i'm extremely happy to see chair larson taking over. his -- the way he described the quint street bridge problem was far less emotional than the way i did at our cac meeting. the bridge replacement was the reason i applied for that position. it is -- it was a vital connecter from the bayview to other parts of the city and without it, and in the future

without the phelp street, gerald, evans, plus all the new people moving in to the neighborhood, removing access for people in our community just irks me to no end and i'm restraining myself. so, again, i look forward to two weeks from now, and hearing what the ta staff bring to you. i hope that you bring some tough questions for them as to why it's going to be double the cost of what it could have been with -- or not. we may not see it at all and lose access. i hope to learn a lot that day. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for your four years of services as chair of the cac. >> chair peskin and vice chair tang, members of the authority, i'm a member of the cac and i

wanted to echo the comments you have heard and having served on the cac for a long time, i don't remember too many issues that had so much discussion and concern. so i hope that you take these comments seriously. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you peter. any other members of the public for item 2, please come forward. >> i'm a resident of bayview hunters point. i wasn't here for this but hearing chris over here, it's something not just he has been concerned about for years. when the caltran project first came up, one of the consistent issues we hear over and over again in the neighborhood is that the bayview is isolated from the rest of the city through the city's own infrastructure decisions. here we go with members of the public pushing hard to make sure this necessary infrastructure improvement didn't further seal our neighborhood off. we were made promises, a lot of

happy talk would be the best way of putting it. when rubber hits the road, we end up with this sort of, what can we do. it's going to cost a lot more. this is a recuring pattern and something as decision makers and the people who run the agency and run so much of the city, you need to make sure the staff can't get away with this. thank you very much. >> supervisor peskin: we are focused on it and have been having a number of conversations and you'll see some progress here in the not too distant future. seeing no other public comment on item 2, public comment is closed. can you read the next item? >> clerk: approve the minutes of the january 23rd meeting. >> supervisor peskin: is there a motion to approve the minutes. made by commissioner ronen and seconded by commissioner sheehy.

we take it without objection. roll call, okay, fine. on the agenda roll call, please. (roll call) >> supervisor peskin: next item please. >> clerk: appoint one member to the citizens advisory committee. this is an action item. >> the transportation authority has an 11-member advisory committee with each member serving a two year term. transportation authority nor the

cac make recommendations on appointments. to qualify, the applicants must be san francisco residents and appear before the board at least once, the list of 46 applicants for the vacant position and details are in the enclosure. the vacancy is the result of the term explanation of peter tannen, seeking reappointment and is here today if you want to hear from him. >> supervisor peskin: mr. tannen and then if there are other applicants, please come forward. >> i'm peter tannen, i serve on the cac. i worked for mta parking and traffic for 20 years and someone who is always on my bicycle and muni and support complete streets and i think with my experience -- i have a lot of

experience serving on the cac and understanding the current issues. if you have questions i'm happy to answer them. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. any other applicants for the seat? seeing none, we'll -- general public comment on the item? seeing none, closing public comment. is there a motion? commissioner sheehy. >> supervisor sheehy: i move to reappoint mr. tannen. >> supervisor peskin: and seconded by commissioner ronen, you are back on the cac, congratulations and thank you for your many years of service to the city and cac. next item please. >> clerk: allocation of $5,806,422 in prop k and an action item. >> supervisor peskin: and if you want to address the issues with the lighting on the hair ball and fifth and market tracks. >> the project manager from

public works will come up after my presentation if it's all right. so the first request would help initiate replacement of 30 foot buses to issue a request for proposals, evaluate bids and negotiate a contract with the manufacturers, the oldest hybrid buses in the fleet and replacing will help with costs. the full cost of procuring them is $43 million. the funding plan is under development by sfmt a to be completed in april this year. they have about $19.5 million in bridge toll funds identify and expects to fund the remaining with additional arm to prop-k of possibly senate bill one funds or sfmta funds. the buses are expected to be in

service starting june 2020. the track replacement, federal funds to rehab at 15 locations and replace track at five locations as part of ongoing muni rail state of good repair program. construction work on the earlier locations can start and later locations are being designed. the rehab work would be done by sfmta. there will be no service impacts for the rehab work, the track crews can perform the work between trains but there will be detours for vehicular traffic. and they will need to provide bus bridges during construction and car traffic detours required. it will be done under contract. next is the alemany interchange phase 2. you may remember seeing a

presentation in spring of 2017. this request is for district nine neighborhood transportation improvement program for recommendations from the study, including a shared use path for bicycles and pedestrians that connects the farmer's market. it would feature crossings and sidewalk improvements and fully fund the design phase of the work. the construction phase is currently unfunded however, moving forward with design will make the project a stronger candidate for funding such as the state active transportation program. if construction funds are identified, it could be open for use in spring 2020. phase 1 that was funded separately has a buffered bike lane and other improvements and expected to go into construction later this spring.

next we worked with commissioner tang's office to bring improvements to the lower great highway as soon as possible. planning to evaluate day lighting at intersections and informal trails, painting safety zones with illegal parking is an issue and other safety improvements to have the proposed improvements ready to present in april. after the meeting and based on the feedback, sfmta would work on medians, speed humps and angled traffic that could calm traffic and presented to the public and be implemented by spring 2019. next, the hairball improvements, this request is for district nine and 10 and capital funds

used to improve -- make improvements, recommended in an earlier funded study at bayshore boulevard, cesar chavez and potreto. the area between the gas station at cesar chavez and hampshire and the bridge to southbound bayshore boulevard designed for the segments known in the study f and g is complete and public works is working to obtain necessary permits from caltrans. i can take questions and we have public works here. per commissioner yee. >> supervisor yee: thank you. my question is around the twin peek tunnel project that has been delayed at least a year. and basically this is -- the tunnel itself is celebrating their 100th year anniversary and

from budgeting program my office in partnership with the sfmta is working to put a community event together. i'm wondering, has notice gone out to the community about the delay and -- originally we thought the work was going to be done this summer and second part of that question, what's causing the delay itself? is mta here? >> let's see if dylan young is able to respond. there have been several hiccups with the contract for this process. sfmta has awarded a new contract that would allow for construction to begin soon.

i'll let dylan speak. i know there's an abbreviated schedule than what was originally anticipated in the other contracts that have not been executed or were cancelled, one of them was. i'll let dylan elaborate. >> thank you. through the chair, dylan young to commissioner yee, thank you for deputy director lafort's introduction. our project manager is not here at the moment, i'd be glad to follow up on the information provided to you afterwards. >> supervisor yee: can we make sure there's notice to the community about the delay. >> absolutely. thank you for the opportunity to provide more information. >> supervisor peskin: a frustrating pattern. all right. from public works with regard to the lighting and tracks. >> good morning commissioners.

i'm project manager of public works. in terms of the lighting in the hairball, the cesar chavez east plan identified 15 segments in the hairball, segments a through o and during the planning phases, public works electrical engineers did a site inventory of the lighting of all 15 segments as part of the design for segments f and g, we looked at the evaluation and determined the lighting was adequate, although it could use upgrade. our segments f and g have three existing lights, two are adjacent -- one is pointing directly on the path, one is an existing roadway light and two stairway lights that are where the end of segments f and g end. we determined that the lighting was adequate and overall photo

metric analysis and study for the entire lighting in the hairball should be evaluated and it would cost about $1.5 million with construction costs. as part of our project, we decided not to move forward with lighting upgrades and just focus on the path improvements. >> supervisor peskin: commissioner tang. >> supervisor tang: this is a different topic -- >> supervisor peskin: commissioner ronen. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. what goes into determining what lighting is adequate. this is heavily used by commuters. and this is an area that i have received countless, countless reports from people that they do not feel safe walking or biking through there in the dark.

often times they don't feel safe during the daytime. so what goes into your analysis about whether or not the lighting is adequate? >> during the planning phase, the evaluation noted every existing light within all 15 segments and determined there were areas that needed improvement. the next step is do an analysis and calculations, they look at the lights and map them out and see the lighting levels throughout the entire hairball and what is specifically needed in each -- >> supervisor ronen: i understand that. but you said you analyzed f and g and determined the lighting is adequate. did you walk through at night -- how do you decide whether or not lighting is adequate? >> that was basically just like you said, walk through at night and look at the existing levels and did kind of an evaluation from that. >> supervisor ronen: so i'm not satisfied with this determination.

so i would like to walk with you. >> sure. >> supervisor ronen: at night and look at the different segments of the bridge. maybe this is something supervisor conen would be interested in doing together and we can look and see, from what i hear from my constituents, the lighting is not adequate and this should be a priority. i'll make sure and go ahead and reach out -- should i reach out to you to schedule that? >> that's fine. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. >> field trip. >> supervisor peskin: all right. commissioner tang. >> supervisor tang: this is about the track replacements. >> supervisor peskin: maybe that's dylan. >> that's mta. >> supervisor tang: i wanted the timeline for three intersections, as well as proposed -- at tarabell and

judah at 22nd, 23rd, 24th, 25th. if you could e-mail me the schedule that would be great. >> absolutely. >> supervisor tang: thank you. >> supervisor peskin: if you have more information responsive to that now, feel free to come forward. >> i'm a project manager for the project. right now the intersections we have listed are as mentioned the funding request could be changed to other priorities but our plan is to start once we receive the funding, initiate the planning and design phase and further refine the location and planning the sequence out. so, we'll definitely get a schedule, it will be high level at this time. >> supervisor peskin: okay. >> supervisor tang: thank you. i just want to make sure we know

so we can best communicate timing to residents given the impacts. >> you're correct, that's part of the outreach plan, we'll reach out to all affected parties and that's why you notice that the construction schedule, the hours, we're trying to minimize impacts during construction also. >> supervisor tang: i don't know if i wouldn't have known about the project if i wasn't at ta. >> i apologize for that. >> supervisor peskin: commissioner yee. >> supervisor yee: i would like to know when the tracks are being replaced. it may cause delay and have to respond to my constituents. >> supervisor peskin: so note roger that commissioner tang and yee want to be kept in the loop. any public comment on item five?

there you go. >> chair peskin, members of the authority, i am here specifically to talk about the first item on that list, the request to issue the rfp for the bus replacement. recently i've started -- i'm here with the san francisco electrical construction industry and working with a bunch of folks around the state, around what the resources board is doing in trying to move forward a zero emission bus or decarb decarbonize our transit across the state. i think we're beyond where the state is trying to get other agencies to go, we still have a long way to go. one of the things that i think is concerning about this procurement is that while it's

technically going to be technology neutral. the mta really doesn't have the capacity to evaluate electric bus proposal. they have submitted grant pro proposals to the federal transportation administration and local or regional grant making bodies looking for $10.5 million pilot project to run the project to study how electric buses would work within our city's environment. mta staff we've repeatedly heard are really not excited about electric buses and have been saying the same thing about it, they won't work in san francisco. we can't actually answer that question without a legitimate pilot. and mta has committed funds of its own and looking for other funding sources. i think frankly we need to move forward with the pilot and fully fund this thing from our own funds whether we get grant money or not.

there's a procurement i think it's too soon but one in the mid 2020s where we're going to be replacing quite a few diesel hybrid buses, in the short range capital plan and we will not be ready to adopt electric buses without actually studying this issue. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for that comment. >> good morning. again. a couple of things, on the field trip to the hairball, thank you commissioner ronen for suggesting that. i would like to ask that the district nine and 10, myself members be invited to that so we can talk to our constituents about that. i was glad to see storm water management on the alemany project.

storm water is a big problem for anyone who has driven through there, you know this. hopefully we can get a look at what's going on there. and i would like to request as part of the work on the fmg, a bike counter of some sort be considered, under or above ground, if there's a hidden bike counter that can't be damaged, preferable. we need to get a sense of how many people actually use this and it's difficult to know. those are my three comments. >> supervisor peskin: dually noted and i will make sure commissioner ronen follows up with you. next speaker, please. >> good morning commissioners. i'm the new community organizer on staff at the san francisco bicycle coalition. i just started last month. i look forward to getting to know you. i'm here to give my support for

the funding request for the hairball and alemany. cesar chavez eastbound is an important entrance to the bike path that runs under the 101 to connect people between bayshore, potreto and cesar chavez. this grouping is one of the only ways for people biking to connect from the mission and other northern neighborhoods to the southeast of san francisco. currently the mixed use path that connects cesar chavez to the rest of the bike paths is extremely narrow and dips at a grade that creates dangerous conditions. this proposed allocation would rewiden and regrade it making it safer for riders. thank you to commissioner ronen for her support of the project and we look forward to construction beginning later this year and i want to echo, there's not enough lighting. as far as alemany, thank you to commissioner ronen, concept

design wrapped up. highways 101 and 280 come together where two bike routes connect. and along alemany is arguably the best local farmer's market in san francisco. with the first round of funding, phase 1 was able to move through and implemented in the near future to bring paint improvements to the bike lanes here. now we're in support of phase 2 for safety for people crossing the fast moving streets to get to and from the farmers market. we look forward to if funding approvals to bring safety to two locations that have historically been under invested. >> supervisor peskin: any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve item five? made by commissioner fewer.

a second? seconded by commissioner ronen. and on that we have a new house, roll call please. >> clerk: on item five... (roll call) we have first approval. >> supervisor peskin: next item please. >> clerk: transportation fund for clean air program, this is an action item. >> i'm transportation planner with the transportation authority. the transportation fund for clean air comes from a $4 a day

registration surcharge collected. the program is managed by the bay area air quality management district and the intent to fund projects that reduce vehicle emissions. 60% of the funds by the air district through regional calls for project and 40% by each county on a return to source basis. as the county program manager for san francisco, between 700 and $800,000 a year to knowledgeable projects. in fiscal year 2018/19 we expect to have approximately $750,000 in funds and the district has established project type eligibility and requires each county manager to adopt local criterias to guide for local

projects, the item before you this morning. historically we have been able to fund between four and eight projects each year. and we're also able to fund most of the projects that are eligible according to the district eligibility requirements. although it's a small program, we have been able to fund a diverse range of project types in san francisco. from bike parking and shuttle services to low emissions city vehicles and supporting sf state efforts to adopt transit pass initiative building capabilities into student id cards. the proposed expenditures for this year are the same as last year. we first make sure projects meet the district eligibility requirements and then prioritize projects based on type. first zero emissions on bike

infrastructure, parking facilities, second are shuttle services that provide services to transit service and don't overlap on existing muni routes and third, fuel vehicles and infrastructure. the criteria for cost effectiveness, emission reductions and considers project readiness, program diversity and track record. once the local expenditure is adopted, we'll release the call for projects and after evaluating the proposals, present the staff accommodation to the cac on may 23rd and june 13th on this board. with that, i'll take any questions. >> supervisor peskin: any questions? seeing none, public comment? commissioner yee. >> supervisor yee: yeah, i'm curious in regards to previous

year's projects that were funded. can you name a few examples and also, in regards to the current year availability, what kind of outreach are we doing to let people know that is available? >> typical projects have been vouchers for clean taxi cabs for example or the sf state, we have funded bike parking and emergency ride home program among other ones. we continue working with other agencies that we work with with other grant programs like prop-aa or prop-k. >> supervisor yee: in regards to your example for taxi vouchers,

who was it targeting to benefit? >> mta provides about $2,500 to taxi cab owners that purchase clean vehicles to exchange their existing taxi cabs. >> supervisor yee: so more of a rebate program rather than volunteers for passengers. >> that's correct. >> supervisor peskin: public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve item six. made by commissioner ronen and seconded by commissioner tang. we have the same house. and item is approved. next item please. >> clerk: adopt positions on state legislation. >> supervisor peskin: mr. watts welcome back. >> thank you. i have several short items to present today. just as scene setting in

sacramento january 31st was the last day for two year bills to have passed and this friday is the deadline for new bill introductions. we haven't seen as many as i'm used to at this point in time, i'm a little fearful of the flood coming in the next couple of days. we're monitoring that closely. in terms of the first item, it's an action item for you to consider, two bills that are being brought to your attention in the case of one support and the other one opposition. the support recommendation by staff deals with sp-760 senator weiner's measure that deals with complete streets at the state and local level and referenced to a national association of city transportation officials. designed guidelines.

the bill was robust but watered down coming out of committee and senator continues to move forward with the legislation in hand. the measures opposed to ab-1756 by senator brough, appealing the tax revisions of one and it is oddly structured in that it doesn't repeal the programs in place. so in addition, i would like to point out there were two bills that you took positions on last year. ab-17 transit passes for schools. it had a lot of legislative

support but the governor vetoed it and asked for a conversation with interested parties to see what's the appropriate funding source to fund transit passes for school. and in addition, ab-342, by mr. chu deals with automatic speed enforcement and that measure was held over as well. those are two from last year. one bill you took position on is still active this year, ab-87 for autonomous vehicles and the process he would have the legislature have them go through to ensure testing. it's running into some issues with respect to the timing of the dmv which are expected in the next month or so to be finalized.

there's a lot of interaction between the legislation proposed and regulations. i'm not sure if he's going to pursue that in its present form. finally, the initiative to repeal sp-1, i mentioned this last time. there's a working group that's basically fix our roads coalition, a working group that sponsored sp-1 and got it through the legislator is working diligently to try to put up roadblocks to the qualification of the initiatives in a fair way. in addition they have decided to embrace aca-5, for the new taxes contained in sp-1. aca-5 was given a number recently, now proposition 69. you'll start to see

communications that say support proposition 69 and if and when the repeal initiative were to qualify, they would continue and the campaign effort to oppose that. so very, very active this morning. they're exchanging arguments in favor and in opposition to proposition 69. our arguments look pretty strong. i shouldn't say ours, but the aurm arguments i have been helping with looks strong. >> supervisor peskin: commissioner conen. >> supervisor cohen: i want to recognize item 7 on our agenda, the senator's name is misspelled. it's weiner on the agenda and

it's supposed to be wiener. >> supervisor peskin: good catch commissioner. anything else? commissioner yee? >> supervisor yee: i guess i'm pretty disappointed that ab-342 is now dead, the bill is dead. i'm curious in terms of mta or anybody that's been thinking about this -- the reason i'm disappointed in regards to the automated speed enforcement piece that san francisco really wanted because we know from research san francisco and san jose that this mechanism really does work and is very effective in reducing speed and proven over and over again that it reduces collisions. so, i'm hoping that mta could

work to revise our effort -- i guess mta left. dylan, do you know anything about this? whoever can speak for mta. >> supervisor peskin: ase. >> thank you for the question. really appreciate your comments, we have been working closely, government affairs director kate breen has been talking to the san francisco deligation and the folks you mentioned to look at next steps and this is something that we'll continue to work with stakeholders on and we appreciate your support and the board's support on the speed enforcement. thank you. >> supervisor yee: can you make sure to keep us really up to date on this? i will push and hopefully the

rest of the commission will be 100% behind any effort to realize this. >> absolutely. we appreciate your leadership. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: any public comment on the item? >> i could give a quick update on the federal happenings as of yesterday. >> supervisor peskin: absolutely. >> so yesterday, the president unveiled his $1.5 trillion infrastructure program and fiscal budget. this is the starting point for conversation. both houses go back now and start coming up with their own plan but it really does kind of set the stage of his thinking moving forward into the next year. and the themes are really attracting state and local and private funding to support transportation. and then delegating responsibility to the states wherever possible. so the infrastructure plan is

1.5 trillion but only 200 billion of that is federal money. the rest is supposed to be leveraged from the state, local and private sources. the 200 billion, 50% is committed to a newcome pettive infrastructure program that would pay for up to 20% of infrastructure projects just for context, that's about complete flip from the current composition of budgets for federal transportation projects. so it's a significant change in the way he's signalling he wants to fund transportation. there are other programs that include investment in rural infrastructure and innovative projects. there are provisions to increase financing availability and easing totalling restrictions again hopefully to attract the private dollars to the projects and environmental stream lining

at the state level to make projects be implemented more quickly. the 2019 budget, it fully funds the current federal transportation bill at the authorized levels and does cut all the programs that fund the transportation transit grants. so that means that the current projects are okay, caltrain and others, but will have difficulty pursuing new projects into the pipeline. as i said before, both of them go to congress now and the final bill does require bipartisan report. we can anticipate a lot of edits moving forward. >> supervisor peskin: thank you miss crab. public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve the resolution in support of sb-760 and opposition to ab-1756?

motion by commissioner safai seconded by commissioner kim. same house same call, approved. and next item please. >> clerk: item eight internal accounting and investment report for the six months ending -- >> supervisor peskin: sorry. >> clerk: information item. >> supervisor peskin: i know we want to wrap up quickly. if you can give a quick presentation and if there questions put your name on the roster. >> no problem. as of december 31st, assets 294.1 million, liabilities at 357.8 million. collected for the first six months 66 million and on target. we're way under budget for expenditures. and reporting on the first sales tax revenue bond. we issued that back in november,

we have three years to spend those proceeds. to date, as of december 31st we have now spent 32 million of the proceeds and we have approximately 172 million left to spend over the next two years and 10 months. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for the report and excellent work. any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. and under introduction of new items, i would like for staff to bring a construction traffic coordination update back to our meeting next month. later on we'll be voting at the full board of supervisors on the arm three measure, item 46 on the calendars. stay tuned for that. any other introduction of new items or public comment? is there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is

closed and we're adjourned. >> thank you. ♪

[gavel] >> welcome, everyone, to our land use committee meeting of february 12, 2018, monday. i am katie tang, chair of this committee, and we're joined by supervisor safai and supervisor aaron peskin is filling in today. we're joined by supervisor catherine stefani. any announcements? >> yes. please make sure to silence all ce