>> good morning and welcome to san francisco transportation authority. for september 11th, 2018. >> [roll call].

>> and q. next item, please. >> good morning, mr larson. we will just put your microphone on hold. one second. >> good morning. i am john larson, chair of the citizens advisory committee. i will be presenting the report of the september 5th see a.c. special meeting. regular update on the bus rapid transit project was included as part of the consent agenda. members expressed surprise at both the july and september progress reports that

only one% progress had been achieved in each month and we are concerned about the length of time for the overall project to completion. sfmta staff noted the pace was due to underground precision utility work and said that this work would not be completed until the end of 2019. one see a.c. member asked if there had been any discussion of closing it entirely for a period of months to get the project done all at once at an accelerated pace. sfmta staff said a balance needed to be struck between two years of inconvenience of dirt on van ness a versus the impact on local businesses of a foreclosure. c.a.c. will continue to follow the project progress meeting to meeting. with regards to item five on your agenda, the c.a.c. adopted some support. welcoming the potential ability to achieve revenue from the pending voter approval. us c.a.c. also recommended approval for the allocation of 8 million funds in item six of

your agenda. there was a question related to the paul barth station modernization project, at with another potential project starting, why the existing ceiling lighting project was taking so long to complete. barth staff said authorization process delayed an additional fire sprinkler requirement and set the work back but hoped it would be complete by next spring finally, concerning item seven on your agenda, the pennsylvania avenue alignment to the downtown extension, the c.a.c. had continued this item from our july meeting for further information. this is primarily because members thought they would need to know the possible locations of any rail yards that might need to be relocated based on the alignment before recommending approval. there was also renewed interest in learning why a seventh street alignment of the d.t.x. and the downtown transit centre had been

rejected years ago. the c.a.c. received helpful information that explained the challenges of a downtown extension running mid-block between howard and folsom street and down seventh and why this routing had not been chosen. with regard to the pennsylvania avenue alignment through mission bay, staff clarified the future location of any railyard and the location of the alignment to achieve grade separation in mission bay, were not as linked as it may have appeared from the materials presented at the july meeting. the future location of the railyard still had many independent variables associated with it. c.a.c. members were more assuaged when i was acknowledge the railyard would probably have to move from fourth and king at some point in the future and that community outreach had been and would continue to be in potentially affected areas. in particular, the bayview. there was a question as to whether an alternative could be costed out that would include

all or part of the fourth and king railyard remaining or under grounding the facility at that location. staff explained the answers were dependent on the still pending caltrain and high-speed rail authority blended service business plan. the c.a.c. recommended to adopting pennsylvania avenue alignment. that concludes my report. thank you. >> thank you, mr larson. are there any questions for chair larson? seeing none, his or any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. next item, please. >> item three, approve the minutes of the july 24th, 2018 meeting. this is an action item. >> colleagues, before we take a motion to approve the minutes, there was a few typos in there that have actually been fixed and those were posted online. i just want to let everybody know that. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is

closed. is there a motion to approve the minutes for july 24th made by commissioner tang and seconded by commissioner ronan? that item, a roll call, please. [roll call] we have approval. >> all right. the minutes are approved. next item, please. >> item four, a point to members to the citizens advisory committee. this is an action item. >> mr pickford? >> good morning. we have 11 member citizen advisory committee with each member serving a two-year term. the appoints individuals to fill open seats and neither staff nor the c.a.c. have made any

recommendations on appointments. to qualify for appointment to the c.a.c., applicants must be san francisco residents and appear before the board at least once to speak to their interest and qualifications. attachment to the packet is a list of applicants for the two vacancies and the enclosure has detailed information on each applicant. the vacancy under consideration today are the result of the term expiration of brian larkin and the automatic suspension of shannon wells due to missing for regularly scheduled meetings during a 12 month period. with that, i can take any questions. can we have applicants here to speak. >> thank you, mr pickford. are there any individual applicants for one of the two seats would like to testify before this body? please come forward. >> good morning, commissioners, commissioners and community members.

my name is robert gower. i've been a resident of district 11 in mission terrace for the last six years. prior to that, i lived in the haight-ashbury. i'm a member of the improvement association and prior to that, i was a member of the haight-ashbury improvement association. i first became aware of that the committee while working with supervisor safai. >> president donald trump: -- 's -- to it was readily acknowledged as a safety hazard. but it has already been taken steps towards dramatic improvement thanks to coordinated efforts. district 11 is a fairly unique part of the city in that it is home to one of the busiest barth stations. it is the terminus for a multiple munimobile appliance and it is bordered by interstate 280 and faces logistical transit issues due to it's topography. i used san francisco transit every day. i believe i would be an exceptional candidate for the committee, not only because i'm

passionate about transit access and safety, but because i'm dedicated to finding practical and realistic solutions to problems. my career has given me the opportunity to hone in skills working with diverse groups, setting expectation, and achieving positive outcomes. i also believe that i am in effective communicator and i enjoyed local community engagement. i appreciate your consideration. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning distinguished commissioners and staff. thank you for having me up there my name is david klein. i'm a third-generation in san francisco with a heavy civic background. my grandfather who was head of the parking authority to my dad who taught over 30 years at san francisco unified. it has been instilled in me to be part of san francisco. after serving four years as a board member, as well as a chair for the oakland fund for children and youth, i moved back

to san francisco a few years ago i am eager to begin my inclusion in civic duty. specifically, when it comes to public transit tax being a daily writer as well as not only committing myself from work but also with my young children, i have a unique perspective on that. and also because, for two years, i spent leading partnership efforts for move it back which is the number 1 public transit app in the world his. it is this unique purview of understanding how a lot of incredible data, as well as the patterns of efficiency and capacity and how people can be better utilizing public transit in the city, as well as when we think of the third parties that are getting involved in this, i would love to take my background in working with infrastructure companies and other technology companies and cities throughout the united states, and bring that back here to san francisco to improve public transit from the perspective of being on the community action committee. thank you very much for your

consideration and thank you for your time. >> thank you. are there any other applicants who would like to testify? if not? assert any general public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed and the matter is in the hands of the commission. commissioner fewer? >> thank you, chair peskin. i want to start off by thanking brian larkin who has served as a district representative on the t.a.c. for a solid decade. my office relies heavily on the questions and insights that the t.a.c. brings on issues related to my neighbourhood and city wide transportation policies. i'm excited to appoint david klein on a citizens advisory committee. he has served on the commission

of the our children, our family initiative in oakland and is committed to service at our community. he brings experience in engaging with communities to the policymaking process which is accent -- essential. he is a resident raising a family and brings a lens of a transit writer and passion for transportation through his work. i am confident he will be a strong representative. thank you. >> thank you. is that a motion to assign mr klein to the seat representing district one? >> yes, chair. >> that is a motion made by commissioner fewer. as to the chc seat to, the floor is yours. >> thank you. i want to say a few words. robert, in his presentation spoke a lot about some of the things i was going to say. he took some wonderful initiative engaging around some of the transit issues in our district, particularly a dangerous intersection on the jay line at santa rosa and san jose. since that time, there has been restriping, moving signs to a better location and better visibility. there's been an overall engagement with my office and sfmta. just on that initiative alone, and his involvement in his availability to be involved in

the neighborhood associations, we are extremely happy to move his nomination forward for this c.a.c. and i stand behind him 100%. i would like to make a motion to appoint him. >> a motion to appoint mr gower to the seat representing district 11. is there a second? seconded by commissioner fewer. we has -- we have a different house. on the two motions which we will combine as one, a roll call, please. [roll call] we have approval.

>> congratulations, gentleman. next item, please. >> item five, final approval on first appearance, state and federal legislation update. this is an action item. >> mr watts. the session is over and things are in the hands of the governor to sign or veto. congratulations on pulling out assembly bill 1184, for which we are profoundly thankful and want to formally thank the author, our assembly member, phil tang, which will, if it becomes law, will help us go forward with a per ride tax on tea nc in the city and county of san francisco in 2019, november. with that, mr watts, thank you for your work on that bill on surviving the session. the floor is yours. >> thank you, chair peskin and commissioners. i am pleased to be here today. this is a good point in time as

a chair alluded to, to take stock of where we are in the cycle. the legislature adjourned two weeks ago and the government does have two more weeks to dispense with somewhere between 800 and a thousand bills. we will be seeing a number of packages of approvals and vetoes start flowing out of the governor's office and this week. following that, at the election, as you all no kak is november 6 th. the stop in the legislature following the election cycle is for the legislature to convene for the new 2019 legislative session on the 3rd of december , for one day. they can introduce bills by custom on that day. there is usually a handful. we will take a look at those but then they will adjourn until the 1st week of january where they get their sleeves rolled up and get to work. i am looking forward to a 20 --

22019 and see what that brings forward. as you mentioned, it is on the agenda for action and i think you've described what it does. i would be glad to answer or provide more insight if you need i think your commission is prepared to move forward on that i was asked to provide an update on the bills that we collectively followed this year. which are reflected on table two in the agenda. i have to apologize. my voice is thick from still having a lot of smoke in my neighborhood and i think, i can't weight until it rains in the foothills so i can start speaking more clearly. moving on, assembly member to authored ab 2865, and in the coming years, if the board decides to pursue managed lanes on the u.s. 101 and interstate

280, this bill would provide the board with the option to ask the santa clara bta who already has the authority in the adjoining counties, to operate the lanes. it would require an extended plan to be developed by the board here. amendments required by cal tran toward the session requires that if that process is pursued with vta, then it would have to follow the ab 194 process which is a more globalized managed lane procedure and that requires two things that are distinctive. one is, it would require approval by the commission to move forward and secondarily, it would require that the authority collaborate with cal tran and developing the expenditure plan and operations plans. that bill which was

characterized as we were supporting and helping assembly member chu, to remove that legislation on the governor's desk and we are waiting his decision. letters have been flowing in from the authority and others. we think it will be in pretty good shape. i am due to talk to the legislative staff who is responsible for this in the coming week and i will provide feedback to the authority if there's anything else we need at that point in time. another measure, ab 87 by assembly member tang which was a measure that was supported by the board is on the governor's desk at this time. it is finally approved by the legislature. it permits a law enforcement officer to impound an autonomous vehicle being operated without a valid d.m.v. permit. it was introduced back in january of 17 in response to several violations, apparent violations, of the autonomous vehicle test under d.m.v.

but in the interviewing time, the regulation was updated and i will not say modernized, but updated. they measured it down to allow -- as i indicated law enforcement to impound any av operating without a permit. some of the burbank area established a state of vision zero task force with a report due by the task force on the 1 st of january 2020 or by the 1st of january 2020. the final version was limited in scope to operations on roadways. there is that to consider. the measure is sitting on the governor's desk. one issue that was important to commissioner yee, was -- he made a point several -- in several

different meetings to talk about this. ab 29. the board did take an opposed position. the bill did pass but it was greatly amended between the time the board took the initial opposed position, and the final version that went to the governor. the final version that went to the governor limits the scope to the bill -- of the bill to operating on roads up to 35 miles an hour and requires helmets only for use of scooters , electric scooters for riders that are under 18 years old. so the initial version was a much more broadly applying, allowing the electric scooters to be part in the public domain and other requirements imposed on local governments pushed back so the final version simply deals with helmets and use on roads of less than 35 miles an

hour. another bill of note was ab 2578 by assembly member to. this was one that the board elected to watch. we monitored it throughout the process. it would have allowed the city and county of san francisco to use ift, infrastructure finance at districts do contribute to the seawall earthquake safety efforts. it was opposed by the department of finance, largely due to the interaction of the property tax revenues that could have been used under the program and how that requires a backfilled by the state general fund if funds are removed for other purposes. so the department of finance opposed the measure and the measure was held on the appropriation suspense file earlier this year. while we were watching it, it was unable to overcome the state cost issue that finance did not appreciate.

other bills -- one other bill of note, senate bill 1014 by senator skinner. that bill is on the governor's desk awaiting a decision. it had language that mandated that t.n.c. use 100% sabs by 2040. that was removed by language that requires a public utility commission of the state in collaboration with the arb and the energy commission to develop a clean mild standard and a program and required t.n.c. to get there reductions based on the collaboration between the air resources board and the p.u.c. i think that draws to a close date key bills that we watch for and monitor for the year. i just would note, and closing, i will be present at the october board meeting to provide a final

report on the governor's action on the bills that i just highlighted. >> thank you. i just want to acknowledge that our mayor, london breed, did contact the governor's office and asked him to affix a signature to the assembly bill. i want to thank her for that. are there any questions for mr watts? commissioner fewer, i see your name on the screen. >> no questions for him. i just wanted to thank the chair for all the work he has done for this to give us relief in san francisco. >> thank you. any other questions or comments from commissioners? and a public comment on this item, please come forward. seeing then, public comment is closed. thank you, mr watts. all in all, with the exception of the bill, we did pretty well

and some day, they will realize the amount of traumatic brain injuries and limb injuries did not make that bill worth it, but they messed up on that one. other than that, we did pretty good. thank you. is there a motion to adopt the resolution in a support position on ab 1184 made by commissioner ronen and seconded by commissioner yee? we have a different house roll call, please. [roll call] >> we have final approval. >> thank you. next item, please.

>> allocate 8 million in funds where the conditions. this is an action item. >> good morning, commissioners. i am the deputy director for policy and programming of the transportation authority. i i'm here to present prop k. allocation requests, totaling just over $8 million to you today. first request is from the sfmta for that munimobile forward program. this is for the next group of projects that will advance with concessional engineering and outreach. for five corridors. these corridors include the five fulton, 14 mission, 22 fillmore, and the 30 stockton. pending availability of funds, there's another group of six different projects that would advance. the planning for that five groups that i just mentioned would be completed by 2020 with

the remainder completed by 2022. next request is from barth for powell street modernization project. this is for the construction phase of the project to relocate ticket vending machines and make other improvements to the fare gates and the work will be installed over the course of the next two years. next request is from the department of public works for the great highway reroutes reroute project for the construction phase. this is leveraging federal funds to the department to restore and reconfigure the great highway to bring it from four lanes into two lanes. one in each direction. it will improve the resiliency of the roadway. this funding is -- in advancing the project, there are several other projects advancing in the area. i can give brief mention to the sister projects.

next request is also from sfmta for the local transit -- local bus. these are buses on the local routes for the priority. the buses already have the transponder on the front of their vehicle. this would install the infrastructure at the intersections to allow these buses to communicate with the signals to allow for a longer rain. and the work on all of that munimobile rapid routes has been installed. so now they are targeting the local bus routes. we are requiring them to do a before and after study of the effectiveness of this type of infrastructure. we are interested. it is an industry standard but we are interested to see how it works in san francisco. next request is one of two requests from the m.t.a. for a traffic calming program. this is where the application -based program, every year they requested -- receives applications from the public for where they would like to see, primarily traffic calming

measures installed on the streets. m.t.a. received applications in summer of 2017 to the tune of 100 applications. they have accepted over 100 of them. we have distributed information to some of the offices and if others are interested, all of the list of applications that came in compared to the applications that are actually advancing. so those will start to be constructed very soon. the last request is for the school process engineering program practice is a new program that m.t.a. is initiating this year. we will be in touch with board members as soon as possible with contact information as who will be leading this program at the sfmta and who you can work with to bring attention to particular schools in your district. this would be a three-pronged approach to the improvements in the schools. the first would be to upgrade curb and payment -- pavement

markings at the school learning zone site and there will be a second subprogram for traffic funding measures on the local residential streets that are designated as school loading zones. and also walk audits. this is where someone from the city will go in and meet with school administrators and walk around within a two to three block radius of the school to figure out what needs to be done to improve transportation in the area. the low cost improvements and the recommendations that some of the audits would be constructed to this request, his a more significant concrete design, and construction projects will be constructed through a later capital project as a standalone project. several agency managers are here if you have a particular question. i am happy to answer questions as well. >> thank you. commissioner ronen? >> yes, i know we have been talking about this off-line, but i just wanted to encourage the

m.t.a. to appoint someone as the point person on the school pedestrian safety project, as dropping my daughter off at school every morning, i can say it is greatly needed. i have talked to many principles in my district and this is a top priority for every single one of them, given such a small and dense city, the drop off and pick up in front of the schools is crazy in many, many places. i certainly feel the urgency around this. it is also, in terms of schools contacting the supervisor's office for help, this is one of the top issues that principals have contacted me about. so this partnership between the city and the schools on this issue is really important. thank you for including this. it is greatly needed.

the sooner we can implement it, the better. i wanted to thank my colleagues for all of their work in this area. this is a great outcome of the redesignation of funds. >> commissioner, kim? >> i did want to ask about a request that i had made a little less than a year ago when we were first having this discussion. i know we had talked about the challenges of the funding in terms of reducing parent's vehicular mileage to schools in terms of the grants we have been providing to the schools. and one of the request i had made to, and has suggested to us that we may be better off in investing in the yellow school bus program again and helping both our families get to school, and afterschool programs, but also in reducing vehicle mileages. particularly for our elementary school students. i believe i made this request last december or november.

i still haven't heard anything about this request in terms of what it would cost for the city and the school district to embark on funding a yellow school bus program again. this is one of many programs that i still remember when i sat on the board of education, having to cut when we are at the depth of our recession and cutting to the bone and trying to protect classroom resources to the best extent that we could i am still waiting for an update on this. honestly, i want to see what the cost would look like. if we have funds that are dedicated to the schools, this commission should consider whether our dollars are better spent in providing a program that we know that our families would actually utilize, versus the grant funding that we have currently been doing. but we haven't been seeing great outcomes or changes in behaviour >> ms. miss chang? thank you very much for raising

that question again. i remember that discussion. it was a very thoughtful one with a lot of interest on the part of your colleagues as well. we will be checking back in with sfusd. we were called following up with them on a year-long assessment with transportation themselves. now is a perfect time to come back to you with an update once a week touch base with them. >> i would love whip for our commission to get a presentation through the chair. >> i will work with our executive director to schedule that. >> thank you. commissioner cohen? >> good morning. thank you for recognizing me. i wanted to double, back with the t.a. the staff has informed me i could still add school to the list. a list of sights. sfmta has not finalized their sights yet. is that correct? >> that is accurate.

they will be working with the safer schools partnership and with district supervisors, and also looking at that high entry corridor is and where vulnerable populations have been the subject. >> i would like to add daniel webster elementary school to the list. thank you very much. >> commissioner safai? >> i really appreciate supervisor kim bringing back the school bus issue. we had an incident -- incident at balboa high school. it was a very scary incident involving a gun in a school. one of the reasons why the children, the families have talked about, as they did not feel safe travelling across multiple neighbourhoods. at the idea that we don't have any school buses as an offer for some of the student -- children, not just under the heading of safe routes, safe in terms of

pedestrian safety, but there's also other issues of safety that we have lost the ability to offer school buses for children. so i think the faster we can get that study presented to us, the better we can make a more informed decision. particularly with the passage of the regional measure. i think that regional measure three, i think there could be some really strong arguments to reinstitute school bus options for families and children of san francisco. i know you are going to get together presentation, but do we have a timeline on that in terms of when you plan on coming back to us? executive director? >> i will do my best to expedite that with the school district staff. >> ok. thank you. >> thank you supervisor kim. we will schedule that as soon as possible. if there are no other questions from commissioners, are there members of the public would like to testify on this item number 6 seeing none, public comment is

close. is there a motion to allocate the april -- aforementioned $8.062 million in prop k. sales tax funds create motion made by commissioner cohen. is there a second for that motion? seconded by commissioner fewer. colleagues, we have the same house. can we take that same house, same call? the item is passed on first reading. mr clerk, can you please call the next item we. >> item seven, adopt the pennsylvania alignment as a preliminary preferred alternative for achieving grade separations at 16th and seventh street and mission bay drive on the approach the downtown rail extension, connecting the caltrain alignment to the south transit line. >> at long last, we have here the team from planning. our director and others.

this is a long-awaited action. the floor is yours. >> good morning. that is a fabulous welcome. as a bit of a refresher, the study of the multiagency program looking at transportation on land use alternatives in the city had five components. one of which is to look at different rail alignment options for the d.t.x. that is the one that is in front of you today. the goal of that study was to look at options to avoid at grade crossings at 16th street and mission bay drive. may 22nd, planning presented a report on the study to this body is important to note that agency

staff from all the various city agencies, not just planning and transportation authority, but mostly iri and economic workforce development, they all have identified the pennsylvania alignment as a preliminary preferred alternative. we are seeking the board's adoption of the pennsylvania alignment as a preliminary preferred alternative. very briefly, the alignments we are looking at, is that the d.t.x. and the third street alignment. and the one in yellow is the pennsylvania alignment. the benefits of the alignment are many. first, it reached a goal, which is to eliminate the traffic conflicts at 16th street and mission bay drive and unites the city. it removes the barriers. it allows the connection with mission bay and provides

potential increased capacity for an expansion of the station. but, and very importantly, and maximizes the options for facing the project. d.t.x. can go first and then the pennsylvania alignment can be filled at a later time. also very important, this alignment can be built four years earlier and at lower cost than the third street alignment. the question of how it has come up, why now? it has been the need to develop a consensus of the best alternative and this decision will allow the d.t.x. to move forward on its own schedule. it will provide guidance to the

tjpa under the stakeholders. and it would also help to be more competitive for discretionary funding. at this point, i would like to invite director ram, the director of planning for the city. he would like to have some closing remarks. >> good morning. welcome. >> thank you and thank you for having this item today. we presented this to you in maine. we have gone through this with many of you individually. there has been a remarkable amount of consensus around this alignment. it has been very gratifying to have several years of work come to the point where we think we have the right solution. this side shows you the number of organizations we have been to the planning commission, of course, the various boards, on the vast majority of the

organizations that we have been to are all in agreement on this alignment. we are very pleased about that. many of you have expressed positive feelings, if you will, towards this alignment. we think it is the time to take it to the next step. we are suggesting that the pennsylvania avenue alignment would be designated as a city's preferred alignment. i think a couple of things that is important to reiterate is that it does not prevent us from moving forward on the current schedule of the approved d.t.x. that can move forward as phase i the engineering on that can move forward to. it is an independent project. we can move forward with that project. they can take that to the next level of detail while we are doing the environmental work unnecessary, essentially the extension of the d.t.x. alignment which is the pennsylvania avenue alignment. it is important to note that there is no time lost with

choosing this alignment. it allows for future decisions on things such as the railyard, the extension to the east bay back all those things can still happen on their own timelines. there is nothing that prevents that from happening. there will be, certainly -- choosing this alignment means there is still a lot of work ahead of us. there were a public as we move forward and the financing scheme that must happen for this to move forward. we have a number of other regional partners and projects that we are working on with such things as caltrain and high-speed church high-speed rail and art studies and so on. all these things can still move forward. one of the advantages of doing this study is those agencies have all been at the table and are very consistent in their support of this alignment. this has set a great stage for us to move forward and coordinate with all these

efforts in the city and the region. with that, we will close the presentation and we're happy to answer questions. we are, to sum up, recommending that you move forward with the pennsylvania avenue alignment. thank you, so much. >> thank you. are there any other presenters? either questions or comments from members of the commission? commission are fewer. >> thank you, chair. i received correspondence from constituents in my neighborhood that said there hasn't been a significant outreach to my neighborhood about the alignment and the conversation around it. can you tell me what community meetings have been held in my district? >> do you want to take a crack at that? >> supervisor, i'm not sure there has been in that district. we have been concentrating on the eastern side of the city where most directly affects it.

we are happy to go out and meet to the district as well. >> this has been a main complaint in my neighborhood. a lot of transportation projects that aren't necessarily in my district actually affect people in san francisco in all districts have not been introduced to this idea and have not been given an opportunity to weigh in. i think that this is the transportation system that will help serve all of san francisco. when my neighborhood is neglected and not reached out to for even an opinion, and may be asked to bear some of the cost of it, again, i just want to say that this has been a point of contention with my constituents. to think that they are not interested, i think is wrong. and also they are very interested in this.

many of our commuters are already very interested in transportation to this part of the city and also they know in some future project, they will be asked to pay for this. i am wondering about other plans to come out to my district to let my district to know let my district know about we are proposing here. >> we can certainly make plans to do so. we have had several citywide meetings. we can go out to your district as well. >> at pleas work closely with my office. if you are holding meetings, we are happy to send out notices. we have a huge e-mail list that we can send it out to and advertise these community meetings. as you no kak my neighbour george my neighbours are very interested in transit. if we can work together, that would be great. thank you, very much. >> thank you commissioner.

commissioner cohen. >> looks like supervisor fewer and i woke up on the same side. i was actually wondering overall what was the larger strategy on how you were engaging with the neighborhood. i am aware you have reached out and got a lot of work within district ten, but i was curious how the largest city was being folded into this. although the infrastructure and the changes are happening in the southeast sector, it will have an impact on every corner of the city. everyone that takes public transportation will be touched by this and certainly the folks that are the living and the affected area will have to look at large amounts of construction two fold, what is a larger strategy for the entire city on how you'll be rolling out and communicating, and what have you done in terms of communication with the southeastern neighborhoods? not just district ten, but district sixpack district three, kind of the entire southeast core door and how that also jumps into parts of district 11.

thank you. >> this slideshow shows you the organizations we have been to which are mostly on the southeast side of the city and primarily in district six and ten. there have also been several public meetings, and of course, meetings at the board and the planning commission and so on. there's a number of meetings that have happened. i just want to remind you all that this is a first step in what will be a much longer process. the d.t.x. was a subject of many years of discussion and analysis in and of itself. what we are proposing is to piggyback on that and add the pennsylvania alignment which will become phase two of that. as we move forward into the environmental phase, we will certainly have more strategy for public outreach, for more detailed meetings and so on. that is yet to be determined but we are happy to develop that strategy as we move forward. >> certainly. i can imagine that this conversation definitely will be

ongoing. i was talking with my colleagues , and i was asking if there was a mixed reception for the project and there's a lot of people that are in disbelief that it will actually happen because it is so much drops -- such a monster. i have heard in my district a lot of concern, mostly negative feedback. as we continue to get out there, with most change, we have to educate people and be at the table constantly, talking and uplifting. our c.a.c. board is also going to be really instrumental because they have their ears to the ground and all the people may not frequent these meetings, they are definitely poised and positioned to give their feedback to the board of supervisors and to the members. i can pass on things that i have heard, most likely you have heard it already and work

together to relax and inform people. >> i concur with you. there is some scepticism out there given the size and the cost of this project. i would remind all of us, and i am wearing my hat as a planner, that we are making a 100 year decision here. this is something we have to think of for the very long-term for the interest of the city and the region. >> i would imagine the passport at the same level of scepticism and there's a lot of consternation around building up bart and i know there were people who oppose the golden gate bridge both as real-life examples that we use and can't get enough of. the same level of fear and anxiety exists when we talk about high-speed rail. i appreciate the staff persons that are forward thinking and threw it all, continue to remain

optimistic. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. i have a number of speaker cards from members of the public. if you want to line up to your right, my left, we will start with roland, peter, bruce, and anyone else would like to testify. first speaker, please. >> good morning. with your permission, i would like to back up to the alignment slide. >> sure. >> thank you. so, the thing i wanted to make sure that you understand, as once -- what you are being asked to approve today is not just the thick orange line. you actually also are asked to approve the very same arranged line that goes all the way up to the transit centre.

>> i'm sorry, not only the thick orange line but would you repeat the last one? >> it carries, -- a thin orange lined all the way to the transit centre. this so-called pennsylvania avenue alignment actually is the same as the green line after the orange line. that is the first one i would like to make. but the first thing is unclear how the operation could balloon from $200 million to $8 billion in the last several just -- seven years. moving on to d.t.x. alignment, there has been new improvement and massive collateral damage of second street. there is no potential for the commission on the transit centre platforms are too short to require elimination of the already constructed train box. enclosing, the time has come to make a choice.

you have the opportunity to start noninvasive urban surgery and expand it to the transit centre, or you can open surgery for the next half a decade or more. should you choose the latter, the only question is what the second street and townsend will take less time to recover it than market street did after the construction. thank you. >> thank you. >> good morning, commissioners. i am on the board of the san francisco tries it does transit riders and work with the friends at d.t.x. we strongly urge you to adopt a resolution before you today. we have been working closely to do our best to keep this project moving ahead. as you no kak the downtown extension to san francisco's

highest transit priority after the central subway, we all get very frustrated when projects get delayed during construction. it is actually at this stage of the front ends that we have a lot more control over the schedule that eventually determines when this goes into service. san francisco's decision on this project is on the critical path. pennsylvania alignment is the most cost-effective and the most -- has the shortest timeline for implementation. we strongly urge your adoption today. we were a little frustrated it has taken as long as it has to get before you. but now that it is here, we strongly urge your support. we heard the c.a.c. recommended approval of the other day and we hope that you do so today. thank you, very much. >> thank you.

>> good morning, chair peskin and commissioners. i am the chair of the tjpa c.a.c. i am member of the rabbit and high-speed rail community working groups. board member and transportation rep of the south beach neighborhood association. i am here this morning speaking in support of the pennsylvania alignment as a preferred alignment for the downtown extension. first i wanted to thank this commission and see a seat for your careful review of this recommendation. this is a decision that future generations will live with for the next 100-150 years. with that said, i wanted to support the pennsylvania alignment for the following reasons. as a member of the organization, reviewed materials, along with many city leaders, quickly came to agreement that although the rail alignment originally proved in 2004 worked from a rail operations perspective, it was not the optimal approach to meet our future needs.

after a comprehensive review of costs, constructibility, ridership numbers, opportunities for future land use, opportunities to net the mission bay community and services together with the rest of the city, and overall community quality of life, the pennsylvania alignment is clearly the optimal choice. i would also like to add to that moving this recommendation forward in a timely manner is critical for the following reasons. first, cost. every month of delay drives up cost just from an escalation perspective. and until the d.t.x. is completed, both caltrain and high-speed rail will use the forth educating as there northern terminus. with additional ridership electrification delivered in 2022, and high-speed rail in 2027. the station and neighborhood won't be able to handle the anticipated volumes of passengers without major infrastructure and station improvements. these would be unnecessary. thank you for the opportunity to provide this public comment.

>> thank you. [please stand by]