i am from mta.lieve supervisor kemp are asking -- is asking about the crosswalks on fell and oak. liveable streets is investigating those. if it is feasible, it can be accommodated as part of the project. but it is under evaluation at this point. supervisor kim: thank you. supervisor avalos: just another question. makes sense we're putting these resources for successful pedestrian stops along areas along the van ness brt and potentially the geary brt as well. all part of that project. with the overall plan in the city in terms of how we look at these types of crossings and overall plan? will we cover a certain part of the entire city? how is that being addressed? >> i will have mta address that as well, actually. >> i would like to clarify and, was the question about pedestrian signals or crossings? supervisor avalos: it is around successful pedestrian signals and audible countdown signals as well. it seems to be in areas where we have lots of transit, high pedestrian coverage. is there a plan that

can we hear from the mta on that? again -- we have had many discussions over the years about how we try to get people to ride public transit. when we have had questions about health care in this project, we have asked the department of public health -- we are talking about public transit and i'm wondering ifln[9 the mta has an opinion as to how accurate an assumption that is already based on data that is 11 years old -- how reasonable assumption is that? k$bo>> i was just asking jerry robbins who was reviewing the study and he just indicated he did review the study but did not question the data significance of the data. at this point, from my perspective, i did not review it and i was not part of that analysis. but if you want to hear from jerry, i would be happy to have him come and talk. they question i have is is the mta taking a position as to whether or not this is an accurate assumption? >> i the guy would have to agree with the assessment that the assumption of drivers verses non-drivers is probably a little l

mta is confident the existing contracts allow for mta to accommodate san francisco's lead with some minoreaks. this will allow for an expedited procurement process. the total cost of the procurement project is approximately $36 million and it will be funded by fta funds leveraged by prop k. we have a few recommendations i wanted to highlight for the committee. there are approximately $50 million in unallocated prop k funds in the mta vehicle category. these funds are available through fiscal year 2013-2014. the mta has three upcoming procurements scheduled for its hybrids and trolleybuses. the fypp amendment would allow the board to schedule a budget for the procurement as well as the funding plan. this particular program was originally entertain to procure the vehicles for the van ness brt project. to to the timing, it may not work for that project, but two of the upcoming three procurements in the next three years will actually accommodate the van ness brt project. that is something we will losthe presenting its september, along with the fleet plan. we would bring a five-year ypp and me

>> it seems like of mta is not confident in this analysis.ave to go back and look at it. >> if i may move on to construction. the environmental impact report identifie'pj a structure impact and it requires the construction management plan. we did feel given the magnitude of the project and the length of big construction of five years, the closure of the travel lanes and sidewalk, particularly on gary, and the potential overlap with the van ness brt construction, the project would bevym0ñ significad unavoidable. parking may be a topic of interest. it's not considered a significant impact but we do provided in our transportation impact study because it's of interest to many people. for parking, the cathedral hill campus is proposing a supply of 1227 spaces between hospital and the 1375 sutter building. the demand we estimated was 1389 spaces, so they don't quite meet the demand. 1317 spaces. they don't meet the demand but they could not anyway because the maximum allowed would be 1317 spaces. supervisor chiu: so i understand in the planning cod

the mta conducted his a study, it has an impact on the transit system. it was updated to apply city- wide for most commercial uses. in 2010, the article 4 of the planning code was established making the planning department responsible for assessing and imposing impact fees. in to the planning cut, the responsibility for improving and collecting the fees shifted away at that point. as i mentioned, they completed a study and the work was done at the same time as the city completed the sustainability program. it is not propose to apply to residential. the ordinance will expand and change how it is applied. howell will provide a greater consistency with definitions and terms in the planning code and provide a clarification for imposing collecting fees. it changes the ray, increasing most of them. in terms of the application changes, the updated establishment establishes a threshold. currently is 3000 gross square feet. the department analyzed development impacts and determines how it impacts -- it is the exemption threshold. the area plan impact fees. it wou

no funds will be moving to the mta. they are carrying the costs entirely within their budget, as is appropriate given the circumstances. supervisor kim: did mta determine their new site yet? >> they have. they're moving to two different sites. part of it is going to their bancroft facility which they recently required -- which the recently acquired. the other part is going to their marin facility. we checked in with a team looking at the asset management issues and confirmed as of most intelligent places for those two uses to go. that has been reconfirmed and those moves are underway. >> -- supervisor kim: bancroft has been acquired and marin is a lease situation? >> yes. supervisor kim: i know this has come up before, but we have a sense that there are other city properties to determine if technology can move to to save on expenses or is that a priority in terms of what we're doing that search? >> we have looked very hard at any city assets that might work. a couple of the sites we're looking had to afford some opportu

unfortunately, the mta is not here. we had asked them to come. to try to respond, we will follow up with that question. generally whenever we talk about traffic lights, the cost a lot of money. it costs almost $300,000 for one traffic light, so it is not easy for the state to put one in. particularly with one lane of traffic in both directions. the mta is installing four traffic lights along sunset boulevard. that is a situation where you have three lanes of traffic and directions. so we are prioritizing some of that. especially where self help is, that intersection, we see a lot of seniors passing through on sunset boulevard all the time. so we want to prioritize those big areas where people have to cross the street before some of the smaller areas. on at noriega, we have worked on traffic islands among other things, so we can ask mta to look at it again and see if there are other alternatives. in terms of a traffic light, we know that our resources are limited and the concentration is on sunset boulevard and some of the very large streets that

i have to give credit to mta for that one. lessons learned to approve the program in the near future, we obviously need to do much more apparent-caregiver outreach. they're the ones deciding other children get to and from school. we want to actively recruit these parents and caregivers to participate in the program at the school, and then we're going to start doing more significant outreach at night and weei]ç at festivals, at school councils to try to bring the programs to those working families that we cannot reach by going into the classroom and talking to the students. we also want to establish regular walking walk-and-roll events. our most successful story is george washington carver. áúqrÑthey established daily walg school buses, morning and noon. this spring, would like to see that every school we're working in. we need to recruit the parent ['s staff cannot leave it these because of liability concerns to go beyond the school fence. it is up to the parents and caregivers to start leading these on the school property. su

commissioner campos: we want to thank the staff of the mta for working very hard on this item. is really great to see that. there is a resolution that has been reached on this issue. is a very important project. commissioner avalos? commissioner avalos: thank you. i want to thank those at plans and programs for their patience. between meetings, they were briefed, and we're moving this forward with greater community input. i want to thank the transportation authority for there work -- their work on the alternative for van ness was rapid transit. i think it is an elegant solution to what appears to be a corrupt -- conundrum. commissioner campos: thank you. i do think this shows the creativity we have in the city and county of san francisco, oftentimes being able to think outside the box of. we have a number of speaker cards. i will call them out. [reading names] and any other member of the public would like to speak on this item, please come forward. >> hello. my name is michelle brant's. i am also concerned that i get the feeling you're not really listening to the people in the

it kind of its mta involved -- gets and g-8 involved. you go to the mta meetings.le who understand a lot about transportation, and they need to get the right type of empirical data, not any thing in detail, but to the findings so focus meetings can be had among the constituents of san fr

we strongly urge for this project's approval, and with the mta and the board of supervisors, thank you for all your work on this. thank you. commissioner campos: thank you. if there is any other member of the public would like to speak, please come forward. >> good morning. i am here to voice my support and hope you guys approve the brt with limited left turns on the van ness ave. this affects the 47 and 49 lines. many people from those neighborhoods rely on those lines every day to get to and from work. often they are delayed because of ridiculous traffic levels on van ness ave. not only that come up with the advent of brt, you will be revitalizing the corridor. if you walk up the corridor, it is lonely out there. it is pretty downtrodden. this really brings new hope and it will breathe new life on to the corridor. and you guys would also be reaffirming transit first, which is part of the city charter. to many times, we have been planning for the automobile, and not so much for transit. this would be a step in the right direction. and that's it. thank you. commissioner campos: thank y

now let's go to the mta. colleagues, there are no action before us with the mta. we are not able to amend or change any of the budget line items. however, when the department came before us in may, there was news with regards to labor negotiations which led to a hole in the budget. the mta, i believe, has gone back to the board to discuss where the budget will be changing to make the department's budget whole. today is an update from mr. reiskin at about department's budget. >> good morning. like the city, we set our baseline budget back in the fall and made some basic assumptions about labor cost as well as our other costs. our pulmonary baseline budget that we presented to our board in -- preliminary baseline budget we presented to the board in november showed a shortfall which was made up of assumed labor increases. fast forward to the spring as we develop our budget, with the city, developed our labor negotiations strategy. we agreed with the city to negotiate literally side by side and negotiated at most tables took me. -- jointly. we did so with the same neg

community with those signatures, there is a certain segment of the block that becomes a petition in the mta? that is historically something that they could do. we are revisiting our policies to take initiative on. >> we are taking away a and we have certainly heard from them i do not want you to think they knew have not been heard, and it seems to me that if your neighbors feel the same way, it would be to organize -- this expansive -- expansion does that have to be massive. it could be by one mark. if the neighbors in the area what the program, i suggest you might save money. >> of the only question -- the only caution is we are evaluating whether commercial district should have them. the petition may come to our doorstep, but it may not signify anything. >> i just do not want our friends to walk away thinking that there is no resources -- recourse. at least looking into whether you could have a zone. >> i think staff will be able to meet with the gentleman. >> one more question that is a clarifying question. their language prohibits the use of contract and parking 1,500 feet. does that me

the neighborhood association provided the mta and relevant supervisors with a letter with keep medications we urge you to look at, particularly the intersection of page, franklin, and market, where you're going to see essentially, hopefully, a bicycle boulevard on page street and on franklin, not the one way -- on franklin, the one way is in dire need of improvements. we agree with the mta's conclusion in the document that in the long term, the traffic congestion in that corridor does not warrant accommodating more cars, but warrants by transit first -- a transit first approached. i also urge you to make sure the transit trains are not impacted. as the medications are not liberated, -- medications are not liberated, we need to take a good close look to preserve a cycle track. there are a lot of moving parts here. commissioner campos: thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> at the last plans and programs meeting, i requested that whatever youtube -- you do, we need to address the concerns of the seniors. you can make statements. some of you all don't seem to get it. i think you will get it

the first meeting is on july 17 from 6:00-8:30 at the mta offices. the second meeting will be on july 21 from 10:00-12:30, also at the mta offices. finally, the study team will do a web and are on july 19 from 12:00-1:00. any more information can be found at better market street. the central freeway activity oaa will come to the committee in june and the board in july for approval. just want to highlight a few of the bike projects in district 8, specifically by improvements to improve the left-hand turn from market street on to valencia funded by the transportation clean air program. that project is moving forward to completion in november of this year. i want to highlight the street transit and pedestrian and repair projects. this is at the border of district 8, but we did want to improve -- included. this is in the conceptual engineering stage. there was delay in getting the project started, mostly due to cost increases. we were able to take some of the second st. funds. we reprogram them to this, but judd. it includes making haight street to weigh

the mta did not complete the necessary overhauls.a staff would have provided the authority with the explanation of why these overalls were not completed. item seven, this motion was passed by the cac and there was concern that the cac be consistently asked to support the allocation of funds. the full fund grant payment is in place. the authority assured the cac that having the local match was essential to receiving the federal funds. item eight, this item was passed unanimously by the cac. this concludes my report. thank you very much. commissioner avalos: thank you. any question for mr. flanagan? ok, we'll go to public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. that is an information item. we will now move on to item for. >> item 4. recommend approval of the fiscal year 2012/2013 transportation fund for clean air program of projects. this is an action item. commissioner avalos: this is an item that we have before us last month and we're getting updates. >>

it kind of its mta involved -- gets and g-8 involved. you go to the mta meetings. they are just going to pull it out from here and make things happen. i say that because not everybody can come here and attended these meetings, but we do have a stupid people who understand a lot about transportation, and they need to get the right type of empirical data, not any thing in detail, but to the findings so focus meetings can be had among the constituents of san francisco. every taxpayer should have a pretty good idea of what is happening with our transportation in san francisco. thank you very much. commissioner campos: thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> i would like to comment more on the way the public comment is perceived by the members of this committee and others and the board of supervisors. one of the things i noticed in just observing how public comment is treated is that there are always two or 3 certain members of the committee or board of supervisors to think that public comment, which is the only way that 99% of the citizens can access there elected --

the mta is budgeted and approved for relocation. their relocations are set forth and on going to both their bancroft and marin facilities. that has been initially deemed consistent with the ongoing overall asset management review performed by a team of consultants assisting the mta on improving their space use. in addition to the infusion of funds from the city, -- to the city from the corporation, to a system covering rental costs by replacing a location or if we so choose, debt service if we purchase the replacement site. there are certain triggers in the least that need to lead to the relocation. the city has to find a suitable site. the corporation has to have certainty they have an anchor tenant to take the newly constructed space. we than mutually move forward subject to board approval of the transaction regarding a suitable replacement site that will return to this committee, as likely, and to the full board. we are looking very closely at to particular sites we think are well-suited to meet the needs. there is the potential

i have had several discussions with the mta. some years ago, and a little bit on you, the voters made sure that we did not mess around with mta's budget. at least take things out and put things in in the way it did in years past. the board has to vote up or down on the whole budget. having said that, we did talk a little bed about, you know, our general resistance to putting meters on sundays. it is $2.5 million revenue source for them. they believe that times have changed where there are a lot of tourists and visitors that come in too many of our sections throughout the city on its sundays to enjoy, of course, all the things that we have. so we believe that revenue they need to have to balance their deficits. we have like a $26 million deficit when we started going through all of these things. i will say that we also talked about this parking increase of the penalties. one of the things that they told me that a good portion, three- quarters of that increase the they are proposing in their budget on the parking tickets as exactl

anyway, i would like to thank the mta as a whole. i enjoy my job. i take pride in providing service for us. regardless of age, race, creed, i'm here to do a job and i do it to the best of my ability. if i get recognition for it, it is fine. if i don't, that is fine, too. i'm having fun and i will continue to have fun. >> do you drive the 21 route by chance? >> no, i do motor coaches. >> when my father was in town he was raving about the drivers and i thought maybe one of them with you. thank you very much and congratulations. [applause] >> thank you. thank you to all of the kirkland folks for coming out. >> every year, the city has a green and blue awards process and ceremony and these are to celebrate the outstanding accomplishments and leadership in the field of city sustainability. the nominations come based on the climate action plan. this year, we have four nominations. peter brown was nominated for being a kreme pioneer. -- for being a great pioneer. we won two of those. just getting nominated was a great achievement. they have a pretty great

is the mta here? >> thank you, supervisors. sorry for being late.greement for parking county related services not to exceed $4.6 million beginning august 1st, with the option to extend the term for an additional four years. the dollars associated with this project and where we are with the project, they have done a good job. there has been a reduction in the annual amount for this contract. it is the additional card processing and wireless communication fees that have resulted in this we had significant attention on the rfp, but we only had one responsive bid. the other bidders failed to bid. they documented a couple of reasons. one is, they were having trouble finding partnerships required in the rfp. an san francisco specific requirements are so significantly different from other cities that they felt they were not able to produce those requirements. the mta board did approve this agreement am happy to answer any other questions you may have. chairperson chu: thank you. budget analyst report. >> but we point out on page 3 of our report that if you