Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20180109

Public comment testimony that are not solid facts. This body transitions. Supervisor yee will no longer be the supervisor. Things get lost. I want to go on the record early. I believe avalon bay will create a lot of problems for us, those of us who have relationships in labor. Many times our labor partners have come raising concerns that they havent hired union labor to do the job. Im talking something that is years down the line. But i just think that that funding that this is just not the right direction we need to go in and we need to reevaluate. Supervisor yee did a great job getting city college free. And now we have all these people that want to go there. We need to be mindful and respectful of the people who have been living around the college for generations. And weve heard from our citizens advisory commission, a policy body used to advise us. They are against it. I dont know anybody in support of this other than the Police Department Planning Department. Im going to be voting no on this and i hope you will consider joining me. Chair peskin commissioner yee, any final words as this is the result of your end tip allocation . Supervisor yee no. I appreciate commissioner cohens point of view. But as i mentioned, to me its the beginning of a discussion and i think the frameworks there. The issues of parking, the issue of improving the transportation really does need further study. One of the things ive been pretty consistent about in terms of discussing with the balboa Reservoir Development is that between them and city college and the city, we need to city down and solve future sort of parking issues. And that if it doesnt get solved, theres not going to be any development. So, i know people, whether at city college or the developers, in having informal discussions, they have taken it very seriously. Its be on the agenda with the developers pretty much up front and talking about these issues. Have they come up with solutions . Not yet. Were several years away from that development. Has city college come up with their final analysis . No. They are only beginning because their doing their Facilities Master Plan right now. So, youre correct in saying that if this were the only thing thats going to be used to solve these issues, i would say i would agree with you. But to me, its not this document does not even try to say it solves everything thats going to be in the future. Some of the things that ive talked about and this seems like, again, informally. I mentioned the shuttle. I mentioned one of the things i didnt mention i think one of the residents mentioned it. If we are going to go into residential parking permits, im going to ask, for instance, for them to pay for that because it is forcing certain areas further away from city college but still in the neighborhoods that will have students parking further away. There are many things in discussion. Can city college, for instance im not going to speak for city college. But my observation is they have also other land around city college that can be developed as a parking lot. So, thats my comment. Im going to go ahead and ask my colleagues to support this sort of framework piece so we can move on and have both the developers and city college come up with concrete solutions. Chair peskin commissioner safai, do i see your name . Supervisor safai yes. I think these are all good points brought up today. I have been listening as supervisor yee, our districts are bound by this project in this area and it is a traffic nightmare. Theres a lot of concern. I know the balboa cac and city college cac and others have reservations about this. But i think some of the reservations arent necessarily about this particular plan, but theyre more about the long term plan. And i think both supervisor yee and ive heard very strongly that theres desires for certain things that because this is going to be a development agreement, ultimately, those things can be negotiated into the final package, such as a shuttle, the amount of parking and otherwise. I think the concerns of the neighbors are very real and this will have a big impact. But i think theres a lot of opportunity and i know supervisor yee has been leading this and ive been kind of backing him up in many ways. So, i feel comfortable moving forward with this. I do have a lot of reservations that supervisor cohen brought up. But i think we can finalize that. Chair peskin commissioner yee. Supervisor yee i also want to mention that i have been asking ting this is a ta meeting, one of the things thats really long term and but im willing to push the discussion. Ive pushed it with the mline in terms of potentially moving from whether its from the st. Francis circle or from west portal tunnel to go under ground. And so, with that discussion, i also was broadening the discussion that we study the city study the possibility of keeping the k under ground from the same point. And that would to me if you put the kline under ground all the way to the bart station, that to me would really reduce the Traffic Congestion around that area. Again, its only possibilities. Maybe when they study it, they will find out that my statement was totally ridiculous or not. If we dont study it, we wont know. Chair peskin all right. Is that a motion commissioner yee . Supervisor yee yes. Chair peskin is there a second for that . Seconded by commissioner kim on the item. A roll call please. Commissioner breed. Thank you. I have some questions about outreach specifically because there is information in the resolution that talks about an extensive outreach process as it relates to this particular plan with community input. And i was hoping to get more information on the follow through specifically that was highlighted in the resolution here. Specifically based on public input received after this Advisory Committee meeting. Commissioner yee requested concerns expressed by members of the public and resulting feedback was in the final report. I just want a little more information about that additional outreach and what was incorporated into the report as a result of that outreach. Mr. Shaw. Thank you commissioner breed. At commissioner yees request, we did return to the community a number of times to hear the concerns. I think part of the challenge was how do we stick with whats the written scope of a Transportation Demand management while acknowledging a lot of Community Concerns that maybe a tdm cant address. We changed a lot of the tdm recommendations or refined them to make sure the communitys concerns are addressed. For example, the data challenge thats been mentioned. There was Additional Data collected a second time and then recommendations were added to refine Data Collection in the future when city college or balboa reservoir go for their analysis. And for things that the tdm cant really address, we wanted to make sure that those concerns were included. For example, safety at transit stops at night is a significant concern. That needs to be addressed at transit stops throughout the neighborhood and beyond. And so, it was included in here. But this is not a capital plan. And so, theres limits to what the tdm framework could do. We tried to focus on strategies that could provide a foundation for and acknowledge those that it couldnt. One last comment. Response that the third or fourth edit i think we invited Many Community members to come in to the Planning Department and workshop and talk about ways to get more of Community Concerns into the document and youll see that in the most recent version. And i think part of the concern is because the plan is the plan. It talks somewhat about community input, but it just seems as if theres a plan that was put together with certain recommendations. But it appears that many of the recommendations are based on the Planning Departments recommendation of the community of what could be done and that information is actually whats put into the report. Is that accurate . I think it comes from a variety of sources of input. The recommendations were from the consultant. So, it started with best practices and their knowledge of San Francisco. There was input from city College Staff at the time. There was input from the two cacs and then that last round of edits focused on a lot more details around data and around so things beyond tdm. We acknowledge theres always more outreach that needs to be done and our intent and hope is that the process and the feedback that weve gotten about the process will inform the future planning. So, when we have an implementable plan, a real plan that the developers at city college are obligated to fulfill, that outreach will be done, reflecting all the comments we have heard over the last two years. Can you talk a little more about the outreach to city college specifically . Because i heard in the comments that there was only one presentation at their board meeting. But can you give me clarity in terms of the board meeting, the students, the staff and the people impacted most by this. Sure. So, the document was first initiated and scoped if this late 2015. So, since that point, there were ongoing coordination meetings and vetting with facilitys staff at city college. And we were happy to present at many times i think at the same time part of the challenge was city college was going through their own facilitys master plan effort. So, there were limited opportunities for the city to present. We are happy to return. Another note and opportunity is i think the facilitys master plan is going through a reboot. Theres a new chancellor. Theres a new project manager dedicated just to the reservoir and parking concerns. And we are very excited to work with them. So, i think all those changes represent an opportunity to improve on the outreach process. And i just want for clarity, this is just a guide. This is not written in stone. There could be changes as any project progresses. But this was basically used a road map to have a better understanding of what the challenges are in the area, what some recommendations can be to fix those challenges. But theres still a lengthy process associated with moving anything forward of this magnitude in general. So, i just wanted to make sure that that was clear. That is absolutely correct. If i could just add one more point. I think the framework created the space or the opportunity for really an unprecedented collaboration. I dont think theres has been to this point in my knowledge around the planning or transportation issue, the consistent coordination between staff of both city college and the city. So, i think its a big step forward and again, its not the only step. Were just starting and it has created a foundation for more collaboration. Thank you. Chair peskin commissioner cohen. Supervisor cohen thank you. Mr. Shaw, you said there was a second meeting, an outreach meeting that you reached out to folks in the city college community. When was that . The second city College Meeting . Im not there were a number of city College Staff meetings. Supervisor cohen okay. Maybe i need to clarify. There was the one presentation mentioned to the board of trustees and the additional meetings were primarily for neighbors or folks coming to the reservoir cac meetings. Supervisor cohen and what was the attendance like . The cac meetings are always well attended. The smaller workshops were intended to have neighbor hood representatives and dig into the text and ideas. There were two or three of those meetings if i recall, with five or seven neighborhood representatives. Supervisor cohen maybe perhaps instead of voting no, maybe we could continue this and there could be a little more Due Diligence and outreach given. The reason why i was thinking about this because something you said to commissioners breed question, this would allow city college to fullidy jers the report that you are proposing. I dont know if youre open to that, supervisor yee. Im sorry. What did you say . Trustee. I dont know. Commissioner. Sorry. [laughter] chair peskin used to be a school board member. Never a trustee. Supervisor cohen i know. I was thinking about the new faculty and facility. You could say, hey, trustee cohen commissioner cohen, stop losing your mind over this. The reality this is how things start. This is how change happens. I sat seven years on the land use committee. This is my eighth year. I have seen this before. I know a thing or two. And im certainly not one to prevent growth and development from happening. But its with that wisdom that im asking these questions and i think that its important that one of the things areas that we as City Employees and county employees fall short on is outreach. We dont have a large budget. We have got largely people volunteering their time and theyre coming in and doing this outreach. I just want to make sure we are doing our Due Diligence and pulling in the information so we have a report that has some substance and some thoughtful conclusions. Now mr. Shaw, im in no way saying, commissioner yee, not saying this isnt substantive. There are very few facts in here and there are questions and i would imagine we need more study, which means we need more time. Perhaps we can continue this and give them another month or two to go out and get some feedback . I find it interesting not one person is here speaking in favor of this. Everyone is against this . I would imagine it has to do with outreach. So, colleagues, maybe instead of joining me with a no vote, maybe youll join me with a continuance so that we can get this level of feedback and get it done and get it right. Chair peskin commissioner, is that a motion . Supervisor cohen yes, i would like to make a motion chair peskin im sorry. A motion would take precedence. If shes making a motion and gets a second we would vote on the continuance first and then go to your motion. So, motion by commissioner cohen. Is there a second for that motion . Seconded by commissioner breed on the motion to continue a roll call, please. To what date . Supervisor cohen thank you for asking. Im open to suggestions. Mr. Shaw, do you have any suggestions to what date or commissioner yee how much time do you think . I can go a full week. Chair peskin commissioner cohen. Supervisor cohen perhaps the next meeting . Supervisor yee this item was actually going to be brought to this board more than six months ago. I said lets continue it so we can do further outreach. In many ways ive taken those steps much earlier. So, for me to have continued this long actually, its been more than six months where we asked the staff to go out and do more. And i dont think doing it one more week will change things. As i mentioned, the reason why im okay with this is because i know well i dont know. But according to mr. Shaw, theres going to be other studies being done. And when they do the study, theyre going to take into consideration some of maybe the drawbacks or the issues that have been raised. Which is like, okay, rather than me always saying do more community outreach, they will vote it into their next process. Rather than whats the other thing that he mentioned . Supervisor cohen i mentioned there was no one in support of these. The way the reports works is they work and built off each other. Sounds like when the question was raised what was the outreach, what was the strategy, the answer wufrnt wasnt thorough. It was we had a couple of meetings, maybe five or six. I want to know when was it scheduled, where was it scheduled, signin sheets. Theres ways we capture information. This is how we do it when im doing community meetings. Im able to say heres a document of every single meeting we held. I dont see that. If we could show the screen quickly. Supervisor cohen there it is. Thank you. I think part of the challenge that we discovered part way through the reservoir process and this framework document is that theyre very interrelated prompts, but they are distinct. So, some arguments there are arguments and questions that need to be addressed by the reservoir. We all acknowledge we are not done discussing the reservoir. Absolutely. This framework was not designed to resolve the reservoir challenges. It was meant to be a Strong Foundation so different agencies and particularly city college and the city could begin talking. It was intended to have robust discussion of what tdm is, because it is a pretty technical term. These meetings were at both cacs in the neighborhood. Some focused on the transportation in general. But in some way they all touched on or focused on tdm. And i think well, i acknowledge the comments we have heard today. They are significant and we take them seriously. There are a number of people who support the framework. I dont think it is only opposition in the neighborhood. There were a couple of the cac meetings that are on the slide before you, we went with previous drafts of the document. There were no comments or objections to advancing that document to this body. But at the time, supervisor yee felt like we needed to do more outreach and we agreed and did that. So, i just want to confirm supervisor yees comments that we have done a number of outreach efforts but by no means is it the end and our intent is to focus the outreach on the actionable plans, the things that will have on future Data Collection. The things we can hold folks to through the environmental process. There are plenty of opportunities and our eyes are looking forward to ensuring the outreach and technical requirements for those. Chair peskin thank you, mr. Shaw. Commissioner cohen. Supervisor cohen i would like to withdraw my request to continue this. You want this to go forward. I will support it and vote for it. Chair peskin thank you. That works for the second. Commissioner breed . The motion to continue is withdrawn and on the motion made by commissioner yee, a roll call, please. Clerk on item seven, commissioner breed. Breed aye. Commissioner cohen. Cohen aye. Commissioner fewer. Fewer aye. Commissioner peskin. Chair peskin aye. Clerk commissioner kim. Kim aye. Commissioner ronen. Ronen aye. Safai aye. Commissioner sheehy. Aye. Tang aye. Commissioner yee. Yee aye. We have first approval. Chair peskin all right. Before we read item eight, i want to thank you mr. Hartnet for patience. I have had a request by a commissioner to make ask for a motion to rescind the vote on item number four. Commissioner yee, would you luke to make like to make that motion . Supervisor yee move. Chair peskin seconded by commissioner safai. Mr. Clerk, we will take that without objection and mr. Clerk, if you could please read item four. Clerk item four election of chair and vice chair for 2018. Chair peskin is there a nomination for chair and vice chair . Commissioner cohen again. Supervisor cohen thank you very much. I would like to nominate commissioner aaron peskin for chair and nominate commissioner katy tang for vice chair. Chair peskin is there a second for that motion . Seconded by commissioner breed. Is there any are there any additional nominations . Seeing none. We will close nominations. Seeing no Public Comment on that motion made and seconded. A roll call please. Clerk on the motion in favor of electing commissioner peskin for chair and commissioner tang for voice chair . Breed aye. Commissioner fewer aye. Commissioner kim, kim aye. Commissioner peskin. Chair peskin aye. Clerk commissioner ronen. Ronen aye. Commissioner safai, safai aye. Commissioner tang. Tang aye. Commissioner yee. Yee aye. Motion is approved. Chair peskin all right. Thank you again colleagues and with that, item number eight. Clerk item eight, update on the caltrain pennisula corridor electric electrification project. This is an information item. Chair peskin mr. Hartnet thank you for your patience. And i want to thank ms. Broussard for the meeting we had yesterday in my office. For those who dont know mr. Hartnet, he is the general manager and ceo of the San Mateo County cta as well as the chief officer of caltrain as well as the head of san trans. With that in his capacity as the head of caltrain. He is hear. Welcome and thank you for coming to our chambers here in San Francisco county. Thank you mr. Chair and commissioners. It is a pleasure to be here. We are happy to report on the status of our electrification project. I would like to thank you for the Great Partnership weve had in bringing forward improvements to caltrain. Not just with the electrification project, but since its origination. We preserved rail service and developed a Robust Community rail service on the pennisula. The electrification project would not have happened without the team work and support of chair peskin and the board and the mayors offers. We stayed together and united and with Regional State and federal support, weve been able to move it forward. I would like to acknowledge also San Franciscos own michael burns, who was chief officer of our electrification project and will be up until this end of this month. As of february 1st, another of San Franciscos own, john fungy will become chief officer of the project. And the next time we report to the board, he will be here to join us in reporting. So, i would like to thank you for the Great Partnership and support and i would like to introduce Michelle Broussard who is the chief officer to thank you. So, we have for you a brief presentation in support of the document you have in your agenda. To talk a little about the whys of electrification. Back in the early 90s the caltrain board supported the average weekday riders and in the last fiscal year 2017 we have in excess 62,000, which really demonstrates the exploding demand for rail service on the pennisula that has much to do with the congestion on the parallel highways of 280 and 101. Really, the growing economy all up and down the pennisula. Our Electrification Program really was slated to be completed back in 2014, but took us a little time to get our funding together and our plan together. But really what it does is it puts us in a situation where we have an aging fleet. The majority of which is more than seven years past its useful life. We are doing a great job keeping service on the road, but for the reasons that we really need to replace that aging fleet, were moving forward with the Electrification Program inner in earnest. The project is comprised of the overhead cat mary system and traction power system as well as what we call our electric multiple units. Those are the electric trains that will replace that aging fleet. We will still have a portion of the fleet that is diesel and that is because the age of that fleet is not 1985 vintage, but 2000 vintage. This will provide for us once implemented remain with speeds up to 79 Miles Per Hour and we will also be able to provide more service to stations on the pennisula and that really will be able to, i think, just begin the era of electrification. We see the potential of electrification something to allow for expansion way beyond what is contemplated with the initiation of pcep. Something that could not be attained with the Diesel Technology we have been operating. This project is fully funded at 1. 9 billion. San francisco has made a significant contribution. We received a core capacity grant in a Grant Agreement we received in may of this past year. In order to ensure that we had the project moving guard, we issued forward, we issued a limited notice to proceed to two specific contractors. The first was to stadler and the second was to ballford, following the receipt of the full funding Grant Agreement, we issued full notices that allowed for us to have these two special groundbreaking events in july and in october respectively. One was locally at the train station and one was out in Salt Lake City where our vehicles are going to be built. With the notice to proceed issued to ballford beatty for the construction of the work, we began constructing. You will see we are constructing the job in phases. Weve got four separate geographic areas that we are working in. Currently were working in areas two and four. Youll notice that San Francisco is located in segment one. What were doing right now in terms of the infrastructure is weve pursued all field constructed field activities. Weve also been already installing foundations in the ground. Weve got more than 100 foundations currently poured. And its a bit of a moveable project. So, what weve been doing is as were constructing, were also working on design and were also pursuing the other contracts that are required as part of this project, which include a Remote Monitoring of the electrified system. And weve got to make some modifications to our maintenance facility. And all of this is accompanied by a series of Public Meetings and outreach to advise local communities that well be constructing in their area. Just a couple of things to talk about specific to San Francisco. As i mentioned we havent started in segment one, yet. But you will see in the summer of 2018 through the spring of 2019, we will be pursuing in activities in parallel and you see them listed here in this slide. Just a couple of pictures here. Proof positive that were out working in the field. This work is largely done in the evenings. We also changed our weekend schedule from hourly to every 90 minutes to allow for full weekends of single tracking to enable us to work around the clock on the weekends. Just a word about the electric trains. Again i mentioned theyre called electrical multiple units. You saw in the first graph that caltrain has experienced explosive growth over the course of the last few years. In many ways, it is a pleasant problem to have, but it has made planning for the initial phase of pcep somewhat interesting. We have been pursuing this design in a way that seeks to balance the needs of the various rider groups, including bikes, adas et cetera. One thing i will emphasize is one of the criteria of the full funding Grant Agreement was that with the implementation of the pcep, that we would have a 10 increase in capacity. We will be achieving that, although it has to be said in order to continue to not only drive demand, but satisfy demand, we are going to be seeking opportunities to be increasing capacity by lengthening. I will talk about that in a moment. So, you see in front of you i mentioned the 1. 9 billion is completed funded. There are essentially i will call it five trenches that require the funding. The first is electrification. The second the scada. There are a bunch of separate contracts dealing with tunnel as well as the support we require in order to delivering the program. This set of numbers here is from november of this year. There is an oversight protocol that governs the business of this project. And certainly on the budget and expenditure side, this is overseeing certainly on a monthly basis with the report we provide to the caltrain board. It is a subject of review on a monthly basis by the Configuration Management board that is comprised of members from all of the Funding Partners. So, moving on to the schedule. You will see here its a bit small. The gray represents milestones that have been achieved. The blue represents to be achieved milestones. Where were at now is were in this intensive construction phase. We look to receive our first train set on property in late 2019. And then from the time that we receive that first train through the commencement of Passenger Service we will be completing the electrified system. We will be completing it and bring us to Passenger Service in early 2022. So, if you have certainly any questions in between updates to this body, this is the project contact information. We run an office out of our project office down in san mateo. But as i mentioned, this is really the first in what we see as a series of improvements that hopefully will not be too far down the pike, including making full use of the downtown extension, fully electrifying the corridor so there will be no more diesel fleet, as well as extending the trains to provide for more capacity. Much what are youre seeing here is supported by a tircp Grant Application that is being submitted to the state at the end of this week. We certainly appreciate letters of support from San Francisco and the sfcta. And most notably, many of youve heard about the caltrain Business Planning effort that we have ticked off which seeks to really outline the Strategic Vision for the next many years of caltrain through 2040. Much of what is applied for in that grant will support these Business Plan processes. So, moving on to what we consider to be the third project of the Caltrain Modernization Program is the communications based signal system which is caltrain positive train control project. Weve been working at this project for slightly longer time. And its as a result of this federally mandated need that it was legislation passed in 2008, the rail Safety Improvement act. We awarded a contract in 2011 to install a ptc system. But it is important that we always talk about ptc project projects by context yul liezing that tennessee connectionu contextulizing. It has provided for a time deadline and so theres fierce competition for all sorts of things, including funding and resources both in terms of people and for the very few vendors that provide this technology. Caltrain has made significant progress. We awarded a contract in 2011. The budget for that program was 239 million. Youll theres much we have completed on the caltrain corrid corridor. But our program was not without its issues. After making several attempts to finish the project with the prime contractor that we initially awarded to, we terminated that contract in february 2017. Since then, what weve done is weve obviously kept our Funding Partners in the loop. Weve also contacted our regulators in the form of fra and fta in order to seek their counsel and advise. I will mention theres litigation currently underway. Theres not much detail we can talk about but caltrain takes the need to get into Revenue Service demonstration, the federal deadline, very seriously and we are pursuing several different paths to get back into a long Term Contract and get our service and our ptc program up and running by the federal deadline. So, with that, what id like to do is just talk a little bit about project oversight. The pcep and ptc program are overseen by oversight that provides for what you see here. There are 16 elements to it. It is a very active oversight program. Want to thank luis for contributing very much to that process. That process is contributed to by all of our Funding Partners and i think it provides for a level of transparency that certainly is unprecedented with respect to projects that weve delivered at caltrain. So, with that, this slide is real busy. We do have the link to the website as far as the entire oversight protocol and im happy to answer any questions you may have. Chair peskin thank you, ms. Broussard. Are there any questions from members . Commissioner kim . No. Okay. Are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this matter . Mr. Lebrong public thank you. I would like to close off with light at the end of the tunnel. First of all, if you google the fra ptc and you see the rail lines in the United States and scroll down to caltrain which is known as pcjx, you will find out theres no progress whatsoever in the last year. Theyve got zero in operations and the plan has not been approved by the authority. That was over three years ago. Specially you are look with regards to the rail cost in your packets, you have a letter from Shirley Johnson that basically highlights the issues with the emus. Theres nothing wrong with them except they dont have anywhere near the capacity we need. The 2012 capacity analysis used for the model, these new trains have got 400 feet short. How are we going to increase capacity is anybodys guess. The last thing i would like to touch on is the electrify case issues themselves. There are issues with the activations. [bell]. Public that has been known for ten years. This hasnt been addressed. They havent got solutions and the main issue is cost. Its about three to four times the cost of elect electrification of four corridors. In closing, the only light i see at the end of the tunnel is john fungy. Im hoping he will put this project back on track. Thank you very much. Chair peskin thank you. Seeing no other members of the public for Public Comment, i would like to go to our executive director. Thank you to the team for coming. This is a critical project. We now how important it is what a Critical Service it is and it was a pleasure to help to bring the federal funding forward. We commit to continuing to partner with you and the Business Plan that youve involved us in. We appreciate the support that caltrain also showed for the regional measure three plan. We hope the voters will see fit to approve that funding Going Forward and want to commit to partnering on blended service. All the things necessary for that, the level boarding, the grade separations, all the different pieces of it. Coordinating with the state rail plan. Just wanted to thank you very much and to continue to commit to partnering with you on those goals Going Forward. Chair peskin do you want to mention anything about doors . I think the level boarding and the upper doors mentioned in the slides will be part of that conversation. We continue to participate in the technical groups. It is important to be sure they are compatible between the two services. Thank you. Chair peskin thank you again mr. Hartnet. Thank you for your patience this morning. And with that, item number eight is just an out date. So, we are done update. So we are done with item eight. Items number nine and ten are very important. But im afraid that we are about to lose quorum. So, i would like to continue those two items, numbers nine and ten to our next meeting. But they are on the agenda. Some of you have waited patiently. I have speaker cards for items nine and ten. If you could call those two items, mr. Quintanilla, we can hear from mr. Strauss on both those items. Clerk item nine, presentation on the Voters Survey prepared for the San Francisco task force 2045. Item ten, update on the Transportation Network companies regulatory landscape and across the country. Also an information item. Chair peskin mr. Strauss. And i apologize that we have to continue these, but these are Interesting Times at city hall this week. Im sorry. I missed the prelude because i was talking to the last presenters. You are continuing these items . Chair peskin yes, sir. I will continue my testimony. Chair peskin thank you. Are there any other members of the public . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Is there any introduction of new items . Seeing none. General Public Comment. Mr. Yip. Public good morning. Seeking a wealthy nation in great unity for the people. Seeking of civil liberty and Civil Justice of human rights for the people. The principle of lively hood is the seeking of prosperity and benefits for the people. The principle progressive leadership is the seeking of progress of human civilization and improvements for the people. [indiscernible] public these principles are the goals and objectives of management in the seeking of true perfection and happiness of our people. Political leaders should in heart and consistency in two studies an extension for the right path of [indiscernible] chair peskin thank you. Next speaker please. Public i want to touch base on follow up on the congesti congestion. People complain about congestion. Part of this is caltrans and the commissioner of transportation to spend trillions and billions of dollars on the destruction of the bay bridge. You have two bridges that are right alongside of each other and i believe it was a false narrative to make it look like that bridge needed to be torn down. Truth of the matter is that any weak spot locations on that bridge could have been reinforced with diagonal braces and pressure tested and that bridge could have been used to reduce the flow of traffic for people who are commuting back and forth and forth and back across the bridge. And then for caltrans and the transportation commissioner after the last explosion where tnt was used to blow up that bridge, they have the audacity to give a press conference claiming theyre going to raise the taxes on the price of gasoline in order to preserve our bridges and our roads after you completed just blowing up the bay bridge. This is an insult on the commuters intelligence and they should be held accountable for that and included when you are trying to remedy the problem of congestion in the city pertaining to parking and traffic jams. Chair peskin thank you, sir. Next speaker please. Public excuse me. I was a little out of line. I will recognize i was a little upset. But forgive me. Chair peskin you are forgiven, ace. Public i want to excuse people for my appearance. Im working hard. Im at city hall. Im working day and night without no pay. But thats okay. Im going to show this community with my new website called ace on the case. Net i got them all. So, thats my property now. And im going to fulfill the whole city on information that they have not gotten. What im going to do first thing is because this tv thing, i created this. I aint going to get the credit. I dont want no credit. If you are going to give me some money, give me some money. Forget about the credit. But im here in front of yall, the city and the county. City by the bay. I had a chance to talk to madame queen, the acting mayor. Im acting. Im an activist. I wasnt born in the projects. But i was born close to the projects. Let me just say, i got 51 seconds. Ed lee. I will tell a story about ed lee and me coming up. Everybody said what they want to say. I will tell a true story. Ed lee, may he rest in peace. Im talking about the congestion. Have you vizzed fillmore street . You arent going to see anybody that look like me. [bell]. Public you have in the papers about justin herman. Whoever sits in room 200, when the real deal comes down you will deal with ace and people like me that got a black face. Because this city and council is responsible. If you take away African Americans and i cant let that happen. I will be back when the curtains go up at 2 00. Chair peskin are there any other members of the public for general Public Comment . Seeing none, general Public Comment is closed. I really apologize with regard to item nine. But these are Interesting Times at city hall. We are adjourned. [meeting adjourned] if you frequently travel before i van ness i might be surprised van ness will goodwill go the First Transit corridor to have brt as more frequently known the goal to get conveniently van ness and geary boulevard one of the most reliable transit systems in the country van ness avenue is a major connecter between potrero hill and mission on the south side of San Francisco correcting connecting us to the marina and state highway in the financial with the western edition neighborhood it is mostly residential a lot of the geography of van ness the rain that is wide it was uses is a firebreak in the 1906 San Francisco earthquake a lot of building occasion that helped of hoped to stop the fire from jumping van ness had a light rail or sprash separating and along geary 0 when we came to the question of how to address the needs on haven because of its cost effectiveness we have found in the brt system with the new vehicles. The new mr. Secretary is a change we will actually have transit in the middle the far legal unit and a broadly prom one of the reasons it is in the center a was it is an clouf rightofway a set of pedestrians will cross from the sidewalk to the middle of the street a. To move the reliable along the corridor with this travel time had been signifying reduced we think the ripped will go from 16 thousand a day in that portion the corridor up to 22 thousand and well have those beautiful new one like this one. With the dedication of the signal and lighter saying that between stops we were able to estimate a. 32 improvement in travel time and a 50 percent reliability improvement as a result. Were pitting u putting in a up to date modern system of new thirty foot high light fixtures and pedestrian lights on the same pole again inviting a comfortable environment for pedestrians. It has become a 3 dimensional street project. The water that is my understanding under the ground and the emergency firefighting water system month will be replaced and new street lights and traffic lights and the paving and stripping the trees both in the medium and on the side. The main core of the project goes from market it lombard thats where well be replying the sidewalks. There are a number of trees that need to be replaced and they will be additional new planting. Were planting a lemon gum that gets to be 50 or 60 feet tall that comes over the offer head wires that wee when we get done van ness it will look like a new street it will visit fresh new looks like the grand boulevard again. Were going eliminating left turns off of van ness into the side streets and places the left turning traffic backs up the traffic and upgrading the signals to the mini traffic will flow more smoothly and traffic impacts as we execute the construction signed were working to minimize these but impacts that will likely shift the traffic up franklin and well pick up the traffic. Right now that looks like were skeleton to start in march ever 2016 are of our construction. In the past people prospective of bus traffic that go unreliable and noisy and very fluting were here to remake the vehicles are on the streets and with the combination of the brt improvements much more rail Like Services with the technology. The public is in for a s c extravaganza, celebration. Sf gov, we are ready to start the meeting. This is the regular meeting of the Small Business Commission Held december 11th, 2017. This meeting is being called to order at 5 32 p. M. The Small Business commission thanks Media Services and sfgovtv staff. Members of the public please take this opportunity to silence your phones and other electronic devicesment Public Comment during the meeting is limit today three minutes per speaker, unless otherwise established by the precider of the meeting. Speakers are encouraged but not required to