full operation of the bus ma za. we have updated the board of conduct at the last board meeting to ensure transit riders and their pets can transfer between ac transit on the bus deck and smta on the bus plaza and those locations on the street. and the legal council confirmed the laws relating to marijuana and others. the code of conduct will be in standard operating procedures and the post order for the transit centres. we will give an update on the security, cyber security crack in may or june for director harper's request. on march 19th, kim hosted the meeting which included cuts from the tgpac, neighborhood organizations and department of housing, sfpd, san francisco public works and dph, ddm and

discussion on concerns of street behavior behaviors and equal of life issues could increase with the openings of the action centre. the acts could be used to identify and address issues in the transbay neighborhood and communication to review neighborhood impact data and coordinate responses to equal of life issues. a discussion regarding hot team members operating out of the transit centre and placing hot team members were needed based on the data and the next meeting is scheduled for april 20th. and that concludes my report. >> this last slide is our schedule slide. it basically indicates we are working to being ready to june 4th. so we will look at a milestone that will get us to those dates. any questions?

>> director nuru: i saw some directors. yes, director harper? >> yes, it shows on the master completion centre that the rooftop park will be complete at the same time on august 20th there when transit readiness says. so i presume ac transit doesn't have to be concerned about rooftop park readiness in terms of us being ready, of ac transit being ready for the august entry. is that the case? that rooftop park is not really required for us to operate if it's not ready? >> yes, rooftop park is independent. but our plan calls for everything to be available and open by august 12th. >> and august 12th to be the grand opening date? >> the revenue service. >> it will be revenue service. but we are also having a grand opening. >> that will be a week before. >> that will be a week before? >> the preceding dates. august 12th is the revenue service. it will be like august 10th.

the time frame will be the ceremonies. >> it will be the ceremonies. nine out of ten people interested in coming to that ceremony are interested in the park. not to see a bus rolling. so essentially the park has to be done by grand opening even if the -- even if we are not in service. >> director harper, to be honest with you, the book is a go ahead -- there's no go on the go. >> the trees have standings. >> go ahead. >> okay. >> director nuru: any other questions on directors? next item, please. >> thank you. your next item is citizens advisory committee update and i believe blu sag get is witget is with us.

>> good morning, chair nuru. directors and executive directors. my name is bruce sagget, i'm the chair of the advisory committee. my comments today are focused on several areas. first is a followup on the presentation to address potential quality of life issues in the vicinity and neighbors adjacent to the transit centre. once the centre is opened to the public. as a representative of the cac, i attended the kickoff of the multi-agency and stakeholder discussion, which was held on march 16th. facilitated by director and supe supervisor jim's office. and came to an agreement pad forward. it was clear the agencies were working diligently on plans and

there were meetings on the schedules. one attribute in by we all agreed was to monitor conditions in and around adjacent neighbors through a set of metrics. first establishing baseline conditions and then measures changes, if any, through a regular report out of these metrics. this was important as we don't want to evaluate conditions and react with resources based solely on anecdotal or one-off information. with metrics we can quickly determine conditions and if needed focus or refocused resources or refine protocol quickly. and we truly look forward to our next meeting which as cindy mentioned was schedule for april 20th. the next meeting was on tunneling options. conducting the study, understanding and confirming the findings on the two versus three

track. and secondly the tunneling options was critical as part of the process to successfully moving phase two of the project forward. the decision makers and public do not want any questions or doubt on why a method or option was determined to be a preferred path forward. nation we were pleased to hear that to ensure maximum utilization, capacity, flexibility and operating efficiency of rail at the center, both transit agency, cal cal-train and high speed rail could share platforms. this was a recommendation we made 18 months ago and good toronto see it was affirmed and reaffirmed. now that the studies are complete, we see the next steps as being a decision on the optimal alignment of the dtx, whether pennsylvania or third street. with sales one targeted for

completion and implementation of bus operations in the third quarter of this year, we know all parties, including the public, would like clarity on how the project transitions and builds momentum from phase one to phase two. from a wonderful public amenity and bus station to a grand central station of the west. with the understanding that the new high speed rail business plan has trains coming to san francisco by 2029, timing would be ideal to have the first high speed rail trains terminate at the sales force transit centre. nation, from a practical perspective it's critical to move forward with the dtx in a timely manner. to minimize the challenges that present themselves as used ann interim for electrified cal-train and high-speed rail. we know it's challenged with accurately handing passenger

volumes of cal-train diesel service. with kal-train electrification and high-speed rail, we not sure the high-speed neighborhood can handle the volume of pedestrians, bikes and facilities and teaks and tncs, shuttles, buss and light rail and autos without major flubbing tour improvements. almost like replicating elements of the sales force centre in townsend. truly an unnecessary cost. for so many reasons determining how we can move forward with the current ais and make a decision on the optimal alignment of the d tx is critical. it's good to know the raff team alonrav team and others have the remaining study lead on the optimal alignment. with that recommendation, the decision makingers, including this here, can then move forward

on the decision on the optimal alignment that we in future generations will benefit from, for the next 100, 150 years. next with a construction update. we were pleased to see the progress that has been made and the kilometers an hoursy an kilometers akilometers an hourskilometers anclarencesy and transparency for dates. with that muni and implementation of service. we too as a cac eagerly await the results of the executive walk-through which will determine if multiple parameters could be met to allow ac transit service to start on august 12th. on a second point, although expected we were disappointed to see a portion of the $100 million, which we anticipated might be available for phase two, being needed for tis and

legal expenditures. last is the facility update. we are glad to see the progress for letters of intent for retail at the centre. and we look forward to seeing the progress on the signoff phases in the second quarter of this year. thank you for the opportunity to provide in update. >> director nuru: thank you for your report. >> clerk: your next item is item 9, public comment to address with you issues on matters not on this calendar and we do have ro roland with us. >> good morning, doctors. directors. welcome. i would like to touch on three things. the scir, the three tracks, and the next steps. with regard to the scir, it's

absolutely not ready to come to you because none of the 110 commenced letters that basically came as a response to the draft, the 2015 draft, have been answered. in the issue of the great separation hasn't been addressed any way. so the current plan is basically not operational. that's the bottom line. one thing you may be interested to learn is that the current widening that took place as part of phase one was neverrentl never environmentally cleared. now with regard to the third track, i totally agree with the center. and actually if you go back to the email, back in 2013, you will see there's direction one to one correspondence.

the only thing i can think of that has led them to the conclusion, is because of the crawling speed of jong-uns is taking them 30 second to clear a switch. on the 7th street alignment, as i designed six years ago. the switches were spread out. two of the switches. we go to them 90 miles an howie means we clear them way, way below the switch. and this is why we can get this done with two tracks. and the bottom line, if we expand this across the bay, i can guarantee we won't be more than two tracks, 0 trains i 30 trains in each direction once they get the correct signaling. my recommendation, this is what i'm going to do -- i'm going to carry on working with center because i happen to think that people riding on center are on the right track. thank you very much. >> clerk: that includes members of the public.

>> director nuru: i guess we will go to consent to calendar. check clerk your consent to calendar, all matters list ready routine. there are no additional items unless the public or the board requested to have any item removed or asked separately. >> director nuru: approval? >> clerk: first and a second. director ar armistead. >> . [roll call] >> clerk: first item on your regular calendar is the budget out for tjpa capital year operating budget. >> director nuru: the board will present the items to the

directors. >> good morning. i'm jean kim. and i've been with the agency coming on 11 years now. we bring the budget to the board in april every year. and bring you the final bunt net may and to the board for approval. we will bring you two separate documents. an operating budget and the capital budget. the capital budget will include the cost to complete phase one as well as ongoing costs for phase two that are estimated at this time and the operating budget will of course include the cost for opening up the transit centre as well as a few month of operates, hopefully not many and closing out the temporary terminal as well. the capital budget will include the base budget for tenant improvements and will assume that 25 million of that is funded by the city financing

decision on the remainder of the balance of the funding for those improvements likely won't be made by the cost review committee until later this year. so for conservative budget purposes we will assume just the 25 million from city financing and utilizing the early naming rights pavement tha payment that will receive for the balance of the improvements. so i want the board to be aware that's what the numbers will reflect. of course the budget can always be amended throughout the year if there are significant changes. i think the report is fairly straight forward. the budget will look very similar to previous years as far as categories. of course the capital budge the will be smaller and the other

budget will be larger. >> just a q. after years of going on projections of what the operating costs would be. we will now be closer to having actuals. it will be helpful when you present the budget to compare what you had been carrying up until in point is what our projected operating expenses would be with what we know now, at least, from a larger extend what our fuels are so we can see what that delta is. >> sure, of course we can do that. >> director harper. >> yes, a general comment. i know you have a spreadsheet. it's hard to follow from april to may to june without seeing spreadsheet changes. so since we don't know what contributes to these bottom line numbers it's more difficult. so i hope by may we will at least see a spreadsheet here that says here is how i am coming up with the bung eve budget.

so we won't finally see anything until june. that will be far too late, in my opinion. on the salaries and benefits i hope that we will get to se see -- at least when he with have personnel. that ac transit, the duties and descriptions what have someone is doing when there's a new position that is approved by the board is. that going tonigh. is that going tonight case? is that the way it is in san francisco? the added personnel that are always approved by the board, what they do? >> not my understanding. >> director harper, this board approves the pay schedule that is required. we only update it as necessary and we last brought you an update with last year's budget process. so you approved a pay schedule in june at that time included all the anticipated positions. >> yeah, but that's just how much you are being paid. it's not what are you doing.

>> well, itlies the position. >> it lists the position but it doesn't list -- like when you go out to get those people you say here's what you are going to be doing. it's not an approval of that. >> no, we have never brought job descriptions to this. >> that's the difference i wanted to find out if we are going to do that with new things. i would just say i'm glad we are getting an it manager. from what i can see, the amount of money we are spending on it is just way out of proportion to what a good it manager would say we really need. so i hope we get a good one. it will be -- i don't know why we don't rent one from muni. they probably have five or six that are plenty qualified. i would be perfectly happy to -- muni it manager to say here's how your it should work. because by this time they have

got a lot more at risk than we do in terms of their i.t. but i would rent you our i. i.t. guy. >> and the capital. >> i didn't put them in operations. >> i'm glad you didn't put them in operations. those numbers in operations just look frightening. and the big operatin operating and maintenance reserve. there may be reasons for that but maybe they will be discussed at some point coming up but 25% of the expenses -- usually you have some sense of your revenue so it's a net operating loss that you have 25% of. so it's unusual. there may be reasons for it. but when we get down to detail

about that. >> those are my comments. >> just to clarify, director harper, the draft budget you will see in may, will be a draft budget. and you should see a detailed budget in may. this was just to get your thought process and get your input. >> director nuru: thank you. any other directors. thank you. any public comment? >> evan? come on up. >> hi, jim patrick and patrick and company. the i this the $250,000 we are talking about with the i.t. manager is way, way spend expensive. i do my own i.t. stuff in my business. they don't pay me that money. i would convert that with an

i.t. skill set also. i think what we really need is a marking manager for the operate, not an i.t. manager at that prize. and -- price. and i think we are going in the wrong direction. >> director nuru: thanks for your comments. clerk clerk calling the next item. the director of designing construct for the project as of public works. services agreement with the construction company to increase the amount from 75 million, 275,000 and extending the length of the contract. >> dennis, again. i believe this is the last time at the podium today. i am here to present th the amendment 95. and what we, do that's turner

construction. they are the eyes and ears for the pga. they work for ron and myself. they've been out there for various elements from preconstruction services all the way to project close-out. mainly focused recently on things such as qa, quality eninsurance and inspectings in testing and that's special inspections which will be -- we utilize isi as one of our underturner to administer all the inspections concrete to whatever -- welding inspectings are all unthem as well. more importantly and going forward with this particular ask is the claims support and technical support that will go in to close this project out. so we've had turner construction oncins june 2010 for the last eight years, and it started with an original crack amount of 38.5. there has been amendments along the way. and now the project needs -- for

the remainder of this last year is another 2.5 million. when i was here for amendment number 4, it was back in june 2016. items of substantial completion were very designed as december 22nd, 2017. we are -- you know right now we are looking at a substantial completion. we are identifying a tcof june 15th, 2018. there's been along that, additional time but also when you start looking at it, there are elements of time that are impacting -- there are costs claims, delays and everything that comes associated with that. that's why we may be six months longer in our schedule but i would as request to have turner construction for an additional year to continue that support. it's going to be very strong. and i have a lot of institutional knowledge. a lot of the turner staff has been very god at retaining that

knowledge and having access to that, even to this day. steve roll, you may not have seen him for years but i still talk to him very often and jack adams as well. so the institutional knowledge is very important. so the request is then to continue that support. the focus of the team right now has really been to get to tco. but we all know that the latter part of 2018 and 2019 will be focusing on where those costs should be rightfully placed. and that's what i need turner a's assistants on. so i would request one more year which would put it at 9 million of the contract to continue their contractual duties. are there any questions?

>> director nuru: mr. harper. >> yeah, i just will relate a problem that. t. project has with fta. we extended a contract like this. and fta said no. just the new -- like we are going to look at the new procurement policies because of the fta. they are really looking at this stuff very hard. and we, of course, are trying to see how we are going to deal with. that but this is the sort of thing where -- they have been with us. these were the contractors that had been doing the job. and we had to extend the schedule. so we just went out there and same rate, same everything. same contractor. fta said no. rebid. so i think we need to keep aware of that now. i don't know what fta money is

left. maybe none. maybe we are at ccf money totally here which means then can't complain, and that's what i hope but this is something that in the procurement policy we just did, because of the fta rules indicates just how serious they are about stings, contract stings. >> within the report i do identify that this is going to be funded by program reserve which is -- >> in financing. and the other element that is important, there's a nine-year criteria as well where you do have to rebid. . we have done that with the tmtc. and we are within that crack that allows for three, one-year stings and we have allowed for two of those three years. >> our contracts allow for two. and it didn't impress the fta. anyway, just relating that

problem. >> director nuru: dreadirector. >> you can just explain why -- is there a projection you will need to get to closeout? >> there will be minor savings left over from the 72.5 that will carry over as a contingency. better i arrived at the 2.4 million was a bottom-up. i figured -- what we need and a staffing plan and i do have some contingentt contin contingency for the 2.5. we are only talking about three or four people. it's a pretty precise core group. i had enough in the original one that we could have just extended for time for the most part but that's been eaten up because --

we are still doing special inspections at this point. but, no, there has been a contingency now, knowing how defined this one year is into that 2.5 million. >> director nuru: director davis. >> how long do you expect the close-out to last? >> it's going to be about a year, and probably beyond. we have identified there's at least one of our subcontractors on web core that will take longer to close out and utilize. so our legal team probably beyond that june 2019 date. >> so we may have close-out issues where we won't have turner on board? >> what i envision, if there's any need for expert opinions or expert assistance, it would be

at that point -- within a year we will know if we are going arbitration or legal or closed out. >> if the unfortunate risk comes into play then we won't have the turner contract? >> no, we can't have the turner contract no matter what after june 2019. >> director nuru: director sesay? >> the 2.5 is coming out -- >> it's 2.5 in the eac. >> director nuru: director davis. >> so if we go in and support, do we have that knowledge on staff in arbitration?

>> that's why mark keeps me around. >> at that time we would have drew up all of our positions and position papers and we should have all the information we need if we wind up going that route. to your point, the project should not take us past december. it's the processing of any claims -- if there's any, that will take us from december to june of next year. but we will be working very closely with construction manager and general contractor to close things up very quickly. we do have a dra or drb process that we will be utilizing in september of this year, moving forward to resolve claims very quickly. dennis is just preparing for the worst. him and his previous experience. >> very good.

>> were there persons wanting to comment on that item. [roll call] that's seven ayes and item 12 is approves. item 13. >> i will be glad to do it. this is a resolution to show our position for director peti. he was here for 1 years and also served for the state of california. and for disstrict four which is the largest district in the states with the area counties. and also strumal in helping us with the transfer of the 12 acres partial to the transit program which helps us initiate the program and get it going. so land sales was the seed money

to get phase one going. so this is just a tone of appreciation for his service. he couldn't be here because he's really enjoying his retirement. >> director nuru: comments from any directors? thank you for all the great work you've done for this project. you've been a great wealth of information and knowledge and a good strategist. so well deserved and i would recommend that we approve this. >> i will just congratulate him on his retirement. i think he's the longest standing member of this committee. >> no. >> 17 is bigger than 11. 17 years. >> you've been -- >> well i was here 17 years ago but i had a thee-year gap.

>> when i was on you were not here. he was. butany way, i just congratulate him on a well deserved retirement. i'm glad he did not come and break up his resting period but i do appreciate all of his service but he's been on for the city and county when i've called upon him for other members not related to tjpa. so congratulate, john. >> clerk: we have a first and second and new members. director armistead. armistead, eh. aye: [roll call] seven ey ayes. item 1 i 13 is approves. item 14. the director of rail authority.

>> the director of the high speed authority will present this item. thank you. >> thank you, and thank you to the rest f directors for having me here today. i'm the deputy director for the california high speed rail authority and i will give a little background on the high speed program, where we are at and the draft 2018 business plan which is up for public comment right now. with that i will jump into it. i think it's important -- i will take a step back sometimes and remember why the voters in 2008 voted to have high speed rail in california, what division was behind and the ke areas of focus and what the purpose of the system is. and we look at it as having four key benefits to the state. the first is focus on mobility and getting people from place to place and making those connections and travel in california easier. what we have seen internationally, for trips

less that about 100 miles, local transport and cars for transportation are the easier thing for trips 600 miles or longer that's where planes really start to dominate but for trips in between that sweet spot of 100 to 500 miles. that's where high speed excels have has an advantage over other modes and interesting other cities in california are about that distance apart. so that's why it makes sense for california state. we are also in a position where we will be adding the equivalent of the population of both oregon and washington in the next 30, 40 years. so we will have to invest in transportation and invest in the transportation capacity. and there's no other mode that can add the compasssy with as little space and impact as high speed rail can do. we won't be dividing the bay or adding major highway expansions so high speed rail is a good

investment for the future resident and what we see in the population coming down the line. the other part is focus on air quality and reducing emissions. it works on 0% energy. and we work on the cap can trade recipients and we get a quarter of the cap and trade funds and we looked at all of the different investments, even though we get a quarter of the fund we reduce the emission reductions of all other programs combine. these are major changes to how other vehicles can travel and compared to the other part of the state and that's a big focus on the economy. and finally what we have seen in other plays is ones you start to tie cities together and make travel easier, there's a conglomeration, you increase the labor pool and the connections and the sum is whole than the bigger of its parts when it comes to the economic linkages.

when we look at that we are looking at what a trip looks like a trip now from california state so fresno is three our four hours. and san francisco is just down line and the same thing between bakersville and los angeles. those become much easier trips for people to make and they make it on a regular basis. and when the mobility benefit, we see the opportunity how cities work and how developments start to really take shape in our cities. obviously the terminal is a prime example of this where there's a whole new district and a whole new neighborhood being formed around it. and that's what we see. this is an unprecedented example but we see that happening other places as well. when we see high speed rail as a catalyst for those other opportunity. where we are right now is -- we have 119 miles under construction in the central valley. this is basically -- if you have to drive along the entire line.

about a two-hour trip from the north to the south. this is unprecedent for the level of effort that that is taking and for the state of california. i don't know when was the last time we built 119 miles of anything in the state and that's just the first section. so far we have invested $19 billion and we have seen $3 billion of activity in that investment and we have seen -- like in fresno county where all of this is happening, over the last year, if you added up all the jobs in fresno county and you look at how many jobs in the high-speed rail system we are equivalent to all of those jobs added so we are having major economic impact on the ground and all of those are in terms of making sure there are appropriate labor agreements as well as a big focus on small business. we have 400 small businesses working on the program at this time and over 1700 dispatchworkers from the union halls. so getting into the 2018 -- draft 2018 business plan.

the authority is required by law to develop and business plan every two years. so this is my -- personally my fourth one of these. the 2012, for each one of these, they are a snapshot in time. but they are always building on what the previous ones did and sharp henin sharpening the process. so ridership updates and all of those kind of number but also a snapshot of where we are at what and what the vision is. and i will get into a little bit of that as well. i think the one thing that probably most people have heard about at this point, is that the cost vs.gone up. and this was -- our board of directors asked staff to did a big effort to cost complete it and baselining our cost estimates to see what we think is the most likely outcome for the program and that resulted in those new stitches that are in

the middle of the slide for the central valley segment are for the silicon to central line where we have extended service. and we have extended that to go to san francisco and hopefully the terminal. and then send it down to bakersfield and then the phase one system. so in our -- those estimates there is $551 million toward the phase two project for tjpa that is included in that estimate. and what we have seen in terms of where those drivers have been. in the central valley we started our design build contracts before we had all the ro right-of-way acquired and that's caused big issues for us. we had to have the timelines for the budget which we did. but we are now seeing impacts and are now putting numbers ow. we have put the schedule out and

in a led to inflation and that adds dollars so when you add a few years you add costs unfortunately on a big project like. this and then with reie veil waited where we were in terms of design and engineering on some of these seconds especially where you have tunnels planned and contingency. so that accounts for about 80% of the changes we have seen between other plans and this unwith. but the other things we did, we want topic ma sure we were transparent and clear that parts of the system are in construction and the other parts of the system are early on in the design and planning stays so we are showing their capital ranges. not the baseline cost we have. and our goal is baseline or lower but there are thing we can see when alignments get picked and when we know about advancement in engineering design. the key youth lines o outlines of the plan are from 2015 and

2016. that's from san francisco to los angeles to anaheim. we want to finish that by the central valley line as soon as possible. that's basically doing -- getting about half way done with the system at that stage. and then we are also making concurrent investments in the book end. so the bookend being in the urban areas in the north and south. on the south there is a separation down there and a focus on l. station and here making sure that that project is successful. and then looking to plan the phase two stings going up to sacramento and down to san diego. but what is new in the plan and what we have introduced is within that silicon valley to central valley line is looking at that set of projects in more of a building block sense and really starting to put those pieces together and look for opportunities to make use of the system and pieces of the system as soon as they are ready. so what we see is trying to focus on getting the central valley section complete. that is between dare and

bakersfield over to oakland. as well as stepping the project down from san jose over to gillroy. instead of diesel trains we have add electric service down to gilroy. that also gives us opportunity to start looking at high speed trains on some seconds as well. we started the discussions with the union pacific railway. and that what that leaves us is focus on the pacheco pass. we are doing projects to know what the soil is like under the ground and looking at ways to fund and finance that portion of the project. we don't have all the funds identified to complete that entire section. but that's what we are going to

be looking to work on in the future. our goal is to have that piece of the line out by 2029 and begin high-speed service for california at that point. >> as i mention wed are in the middle of the public comment period. so public comment period lasts through may 7th. i believe that the board had sent us letters for previous business plans so of course we would welcome any feedback and suggestions and comments you ma i have on this one. you can see there's 15 different ways to get in touch with us. you know how to find us but you can mail it to us or email us. and of course we will be meeting in los angeles this month and hearing from the public as well as our board. this plan was a draft plan and the board will have a chance to weigh-in on an april meeting as well as the may adoption which will most likely be in san jose. so with that i will just open it up for questions.

>> director nuru: questions, board members. director reiskin. >> not a. we just comment. first of all, thank you for coming. i think we were encouraged by the latest draft of the business plan. i think the phasing that seems to understand the importance of the northern segment, the san francisco to san jose segment of high speed rail, it's reflected in this approach which is fantastic. obviously this whole agency was put together to get rail service to the transit centre and that's why we watched to have high speed rail join the board. is we turn our focus to getting cal-train and high-speed rail here, speaking as the city's transportation director is the regional transportation priority for san francisco. the business plan is very encouraging am i would just

reemphasize the comments made by the cac chair, getting to san francisco means getting to the transbay centre if it's going to be viable stopping short at townsend it won't be viable transportation, and the center of where the population growth is where the transbay transit centre is. so we are glad that the 550 is still in there, given that our last estimate bass 4 billion. and it's probably going to be a lot more than. that we will probably need to continue working with the state and others on funding for it. but very encouraging, this latest businessman. and i think you can speak for board and say this board looks very forward with having high speed rail authorized staff work on it. >> thank you very much, the terminal is our goal in san francisco and that's what the voters told us that's where they want us and that's certainly part of our plans and we look

forward to working with you to make that happen and obviously having a representative on the board. i don't want to speed for director armistead, but we are excited to be a part of this process. >> absolutely. the big driving plan for this was a high-speed platform which is what essentially got us started on the terminal that we have. i hear now that high-speed rail may be telling deredon that the trains are 700 feet or something like that. what length is -- because i don't know that it matters to us, now that we can built, actually support 1,000-foot. but derodon has to accommodate the same trains we do. has there been a decision there?

>> i will turn it over to mr. armistead. >> director nuru: yes, you may. >> we have a definition for deredon but it's not our desired platform length. we are not going to platform the entire train there. so we will have to have operational special accommodation to have that shortened platform. we are now looking at -- we have always been looking at eight car train set at about 450, and a four-car train set is 1100 feet. so we would like to platform the spire train. put we can make special accommodation to the platforms of the train. and that's what we are doing. ideally you don't want do that. pause it increased our drill time and make for a more incumbent situation. but in the situation we have

made a special accommodation this. >> but that wouldn't work at the terminal. >> no. the passengers loads are too greatty terminal to have something like that. >> the longer platform are driven by wanting to be able to put two trains together and run them as one, basically? so there is more cop straint on the capacity than on our dedicated line so getting up to the terminals going up to san francisco is really critical. versus in san jose train trains can turn around and go south from there on the dedicated line so it's easier to have service from there. >> there's also when we have service in the morning i would like to have trains sitting in the platform am i can have one single train set out and have one waiting to ride the next single train set out. but in a terminal station you want the longer platform.

>> a followup again, capital corridor arements. i don't know where we they are at. but is high-speed rail in agreement on whether it's a stacked rail or tunnel rail? >> that's between bta and bart. >> it doesn't involve capital corridor. >> but is high speed rail concerned about any of that? >> i don't any we have a tunneling option -- >> so they have bart and there was a decision whether to have twin board tunnel or the stacked tunnel and that doesn't impact us but i think they just voted recently for the single tunnel. i think both board did that in the last week or two. >> thank you. >> if i could make a comment. i want to thank you for making the trip here. this was very informative. i assure you that the reason would be ready to receive two end in 2029.

and up don't have to go to there -- you can go to the transit centre. >> thank you very much. >> director nuru: thank you again for coming. we do have one public comment. >> clerk: we do. mr. will h lebrun would like to comment on the item. >> let me start by seconding director's comments it's not 4th and king. with regard to derodon. the platform lengths are 1400 feet so there cannot to be two trains of 700 feet each. and this is why the 7th street alignment was to make that possible at transbay because all the 400 feet that you are wastes

now. where the platforms are. that's how you get to 400 feet and don't meet the emissions. six two lengths. that was the whole point of the alignment. but moving south, i think i may have saved us because it destroyed the planning in the village and further where i live we got further success and i believe -- i probably condistributed to this last year in sacramento. and now we have a beautiful plan moving. but not only that 20 years down the road we pretty much know how we will have a real high speed line. but then the problems start. because the current business plan is to have service between san francisco and the different kind of service in the central valley. my question to you is while the maintenance facility in central

valley, how is it that work? >> so-so the plan was to go back. which was to forget about the past. it means from holster, the lines are down. it's privately owned. even sold to a company thee years ago. and then from holster, we take a straight shot via -- we head fortresfor fresno. it's critical because we need the housing in fresno. we can no longer live the way we are living in silicon valley and fresno is the only hope we have got. obviously we have the opportunity on this side. the funding is essentially going to come from what is going on in central valley right now. the authority were warned eight years ago that have more --

ducts in the section that they have in 1,000 month. that's the cars and all the impacts are coming from. this has to be stopped. and it will be reviewed and now we will have this significant connection between gilroy and fresno. thank you very much. >> clerk: that includes the comments for that item. are you ready for next item. >> director nuru: i'm ready for the next item. >> clerk: the next item is the downtown rail sting studies. >> director nuru: this sum is presented by john flint from the review panel. >> good morning, directors. i represent the transportation authorized authority am i would like to welcome the new members of the board. it's nice to see familiar faces and some news ones and this is a very important and exciting

project. i'm sure you are looking forward to it. the appeal review was conducted at the qualify ou request of our board. and the legitimacy of it -- for a time there was a series of studies being done by different edgeties and they appear to have some conflicting result. director harper. i recall you had some concerns about that yourself. some report said that the alinement need three tracks and some said that they only need two tracks. so the purpose of this review was to get a panel of experts to take a look at the three report and hopefully come to a conclusion of what indeed was needed.

the panel elected on their members, donell cross an cross donell cross and george. the panel conducted three workshops the first two were all-bay events and they involved interviews with all the operators inspect one day, and then the following day interviews with the three preparers of the three reports. after that the panel convened on their own to develop a draft report. that draft report was then brought to a third workshop in which all the stakeholders were present and the questions were

discussed and the concerns were discussed and at the end there was a general consensus on the findings. at this point i will introduce john flint, the chair of the panel, to introduce the findings. >> thank you, luis. and good morning, board members and directors. i'm going to jump right into -- you can hear me? okay. i will jump right into the general period u panel. as luis said we started off with three different throorts wer reports that were developed between june and october of 2017. a few general observations. all three report concluded that trains operate within 2 minutes of scheduled times were sufficient with two tracks.

however consistent within daily operational is not a daily assumption. a performance standard of 5 minutes and 59 second and california rail will operate at a standard of 5 minutes. and the swiss railways considered to be the gold standard for on-time performance, operates within plus or minus 3 minutes so the 2-minute operational assumption that was used in preparing these three studies is not a realistic operational assumption for daily operation of the terminal. so pertubation analysis was done. and that determines when trains are not on time due to tow delays or incidents.

we came up with three major findings. number one, three tracks are definitely required to provide reliable and dependable service at the ttc or stc. we use both. secondly, california high-speed rail and cal-train must be able to be on at bases of the stc. number three, the column configuration of the stc limits track geographies within the box of the throat of the g tx. additional findings and observations of the panel included the stc would be running at or near capacity at the full or initially blended service. the new underground station at 4th and townsend will likely have strategic and tactical

submitten submittance. and it may be improvedded oed on all three tracks and reconf reco reconconferringing it. the panel concluded there may be operational value for trains at the existing fourth and kane yard. all studies must use a consistent dtx track configuration and a similar kind of analysis tool. and finally all estimate laying results considered by the panel assumed a high performance train control system that is safely provided very short-term times and very short times for train movements through the g tx. thent