and we've heard from a lot of merchants as well as the transportation authority commission. and the allotment will go towards $4 million for the directed business support program. and this program will be for a citywide directed business support program. providing grant awards to businesses impacted. and you have to be a major impact construction project, with some type of significant delay, in order to qualify for this funding. and then we have $1 million set aside specifically for the revolving loan fund for construction mitigation. and that's loans with 0% interest and zero risk for any project, with an sfmta scope of work. and the idea is that merchants would be able to utilize this fund as soon as the project commences. and that is the end of my presentation. are there any questions? >> commissioner dooley. >> i have a couple questions. can you just run me through -- i assume this is in place on the van ness corridor. i drive down there a lot. it seems like no access at all for any of the businesses. i no longer shop on van ness. for van ness specifically, that project

. >> tonight is the first oor people to weigh in before the metropolitan transportation commission financing authority which will hold a public hearing in two weeks and then a vote to public meeting, check out my twitter feed and facebook page for a link to a five-minute virtual open house. it has a pretty good amount of information. here's what's inform consideration. they want to convert the hov lanes, the carpool lanes to express lanes in the summer of 2020. that is in part because 20% of hov lane users don't pay. they're carpool cheap. the drivers would be required to have fastrak transponders for anybody who wants to use the express lanes. the toll would be dynamic pricing starting at 50 cents per trip going up from there depending on congestion. january. they will consider making changes to the existing express la ocounty. you can find details in my twitter feed and facebook page as well. that s some folks who drive clean air vehicles pay a little more and increasing the minimum toll. so all of this could affect you if you want to have your say, you have until january 18th to weigh in either in

board of supervisors to write a resolution requiring the public utilities commission and the municipal transportation authorities who have another polls to amend their contracts and standards to be consistent with those that we're requesting to be made. >> thank you. thank you for your work on this matter. next speaker, please. >> thank you so much. i'm going to continue with the talking points. ironically, on my phone. so option one is do not implement 190-19 until marc march 15th. the court of appeal will act between january 1st and march 15th. if the court rules in our favor we don't have to implement this and we should vacate 1950-19. we respectly request that you wait to consider to implement 190-19 until after march 15th. if the court rules the f satisfy guard san franciscos and the beauty of san francisco. we need to make sure the ordinance has the possibility of being voided if the court of appeals rules against the fcc. it will be vacated if the federal court rules the local municipalities are not subject to the scc orders of september 2018 or the telecom act of 1996 or middle-class tax relief and job o

i've served on board of design planning commission, city council, mayor, transportation authority and regional and local planning. been there. i was asked to conduct an analysis of this project putting all my experience into it. i conducted an analysis of the property at 95 nordhoff street. given the current design characteristics and feasibility of including accessory dwelling units on the property. my examination focused on review of the proposed four lot split with architectural plans to modify the existing home and adding two new single family homes on nordhoff street while leaving -- >> i'm sorry to interrupt you. have you been hired by the project sponsor -- >> excuse me? >> were you hired to conduct the studies? >> he asked me to review the project and make any suggestions, which i did. >> if you are part of the team then your opportunity to speak was under their presentation. >> well -- >> yeah. so as i remember, the project sponsor had submitted but you left on the table that would have been your time to speak. but you didn't. but i will let you finish as long as you keep it

transportation authority meeting for today, tuesday, december 10th, 2019. our clerk is mr. alberto quintanilla. if us please call the roll. >> commissioner brown? brown absent. commission fewer? >> present. >> commissioner haney? >> present. >> commissioner ronen? ronen absent. commissioner safai? safai absent. commissioner walton? >> present. >> commissioner yee? >> present. >> yee present. we have quorum. >> thank you, mr. quintanilla. could you please call the next item. >> clerk: item number. citizens' advisory report. >> commissioner stefani is amongst us. mr. larson. >> good morning, chair peskin, vice chair mandelman and commissioners. i'm here to report on the november 20th meeting of the c.a.c. starting with item 5, allocation of $3.3 million for better market street. critical to the success of the project. smta noted the project working group, which included business along market street and the planned turnaround. as well as coordinating with developers on large projects for mid-market. c.a.c. members also reacted favorably to the elimination of private vehicle traffic on all of market street, in the project area below 10th street. seeing this as an advantage

transportation authority meeting for today, tuesday, december 10th, 2019. our clerk is mr. alberto quintanilla. if us please call the roll. >> commissioner brown? brown absent. commission fewer? >> present. >> commissioner haney? >> present. >>

authorizing the planning department to confirm existing and create new and resized designtions of priority production areas by the association of bay area governments and the metropolitan transportation commission of the planned bay area 50 update. >> thank you. i am proud to expand this city-wide alongside supervisor fewer. it is important for san francisco to plan for our own future to pro actively say where we want more housing and to plan for increased housing density alongside improvements to public transit and important in. >> structure. we must do this with the input and support of the community. we continued from last week for further clarifications about the implications for pdas. since the last committee meeting i met with the principal planner at the association of bay area governments leading the pda program. one issue the public brought up was how pda boundaries would be misused as a target for private development. he relayed to me pdas only make cities eligible for additional resources and funding and are not tied to production goals. if a pda receives planning funds, the community gets to decide the specific boundaries of the plan area and not bound by the pda maimed. cities can

transportation safety board, the very committee that the majority has underway. we have the inspector general, department of justice criminal investigation, securities and exchange commission and others, the indonesian and the ethiopian authorities as well, so multiple investigations with a lot going on. we have the administrator of the faa, so thanks for being here. as i recall you've been on the job for four months so you are here to talk right now about a path forward. where we are, what we've learned and the path forward. in the second panel, we have a number of folks including, quasi-whistleblowers. they have not sought official was deplore status but folks that play that role of whistleblowers so we have folks that were there intimately involved in the process and they're able to shed some light on what was going on on the ground, so we have someone who is the current administrator who has been there for four months, we have folks that were involved in the process on the ground that are somewhat whistleblower status. but what we have not hadn't any of these hearings are the people that actually made the decisions, back when this process was being certified, there is a gap in this hearing and ranking member graves and i hav

of transportation and inspector general, the department of justice criminal investigation, the securities and exchange commission investigation, and others. the indonesian and the ethopian authorities as well. so, multiple investigations. a lot going on. today at this hearing, we have the administrator of the faa, and mr. dickson, thank you for being here. as i recall you have been on the job for four months, and so year here to bach about i guess the path forward, where we are, what we have learned and the path forward. the second panel we have a number of forward including quasi-whistle-blower, i am not being derogatory but they have not sought official whistle-blower status but played the role of whistle-blowers, folks who were involved in the process and able to shedlight on what was going on the ground. so we have someone, the administrator, who is the current administrator and has been four months. we have folks involved in the process on the ground that are, again, somewhat whistle-blower status. what we don't have and haven't had in any of these hearings are the people who actually made the decisions back when been this process -- when the aircraft was being certified. ther