Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20240714

We have a quorum. Thank you. Colleagues, a couple of pieces of the house cleaning. One is that commissioner stefani his not with us today, so can we have a motion to excuse her . Made by commissioner mandelman, seconded by commissioner brown. We will take that by without objection. At 11 00 a. M. Were going to have to recess for a press conference on the steps of this building and we will reconvene when that press conference is done. With that, please call you next item. Item citizen advisory report. Good morning. Good morning commissioners. I am john larson, chair of the Citizens Advisory Committee and im here to report on the june 26th meeting of the,. Beginning with items five and six and the Fund Exchange, milliondollar Fund Exchange to effectuate that project, we recommended approval of the Fund Exchange and inquired about certain aspects of better Market Street. One continuing concern voiced is the current design of the ventilation grates and bicyclists getting their tires caught in them. Project staff noted that the proposed sidewalk level cycle track within the better Market Street project substantially removes that conflict, all the bicyclists making turns on the roadway still need to be vigilant even with any grade redesign. In response to a question related to techniques being used with regard to hidden or unknown utilities, project staff noted that with 70 station constructions for the metro, utilities were identified and moved, but areas behind the stations may still have abandoned lines. Selfreports to the c. A. C. That being mindful of the experience that we are using slots trenching and Ground Penetrating radar to identify early on what may need to be addressed beneath the surface and avoid the kind of delays that have plagued the van ness project. Turning to item seven on your identity, agenda, the c. A. C. Voted not to approve to moved to approve the request because of concern over the percentage that the project cost devoted to Construction Management. Staff noted that after further communication with bart project staff, owing to the station being open during construction, more active Construction Management was required then its than is usual, and any addition, the cost of the project bid overall had gone up, while the Construction Management portion had not, so the management percentage of the project overall had gone down. Although c. A. C. Members did that increased cost and said it was not the optimum way to bring the percentage down, at least it did not also affected proportionally , so this was the allocation request and this item was recommended for approval by the c. A. C. The c. A. C. Also adopted a motion of support for the planned the plan they goals and project list. Item 11 on your agenda. While there was general enthusiasm for many of the projects and visions laid out in the project list, c. A. C. Members reiterated the importance of equity at both local and regional levels and how services to communities of concern are addressed. T. A. Staff noted that San Francisco had made sure to include equity as one of its plan bay area goals and to be mindful of San Franciscos particular equity needs within the larger framework. Staff also noted, in response to question on how much path planned goals work reflected in current reality, that the plan evolves and focusing on highways and developments of outer regions of the bay area to be more attentive to Regional Transit and building density in currently developed areas. In Public Comment, the need for the plan to include regional Bus Solutions to replace commuter shuttles and ways to increase contributions in the private sector to fund these projects to support growth were voiced and acknowledged by the c. A. C. That completes my report. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions for mr. Larson . Seeing none, is there any Public Comment on this item . Seeing no Public Comment, Public Comment is closed. Mr. Clerk, please read the next item. Approve the minutes of the june 25th, 2019 meeting. This is an action item. Are there any members of the public would like to speak to the minutes . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Is there a motion to approve the june 25th minutes . Made by is that a disc gesticulation, commissioner ronen, or were you making a motion . Sorry. Is there a motion to approve the june 25th minutes, made by commissioner yee, seconded by commissioner mandelman. On that item, a roll call please [roll call] we have approval. Thank you. Next item, please. Item four, final approval on first appearance for the federal legislation update. I understand the state senate was up late last night. Yes, it was. I wasnt there for the session. I was birthed. I was preparing for it this morning. They were up late. There are a couple of bills that i want to address and then i will talk about state budget in relation to the state budget, the housing trailer bill. There has been a significant update on that. Finally, i have a couple small bills i want to bring to your attention and give you an update on where things stand. First off, staff is recommended in your packet a support on a. B. 277 that deals with the local Partnership Program that was embedded in s. B. One. There has been a controversy brewing between the state Transportation Commission who administer the program and a number of local agencies around the state over the approach in the bill, or the approach in the program, and this legislation is intended to rectify what the legislature thought they had enacted. Recently it was amended to have an acceptable proportion of 85 for a formula to recipient counties around the state, 15 for a competitive pot, mainly for small, rural, and those entities that have a developer fee that is uniform throughout the county. That 8515 split was found to be acceptable by the majority of the county coalition. They testified in support yesterday in the Assembly Transportation committee to build it and it is moving forward. In addition, i meant to mention that the staff has recommended moving from a wash of a support now that the formula is found to be acceptable. Secondarily, a. B. 1605 is the bill that deals with the crooked streets reservation program. That bill is in the Transportation Committee this afternoon. I will be racing staff back to the committee to be there to help make sure that that bill moves. It looks to be in very good shape so we expect that bill to move on. In addition, with regard to the state budget, overall the transportation budget was very, very boring, both houses simply were adopted with what the governor proposed in the number of different categories. There was very little in conference committee. But it i will just point out that with respect to. Chairman brinkman , resources, 2 billion was provided for state and local road maintenance, so that was maintained. Caltrain was fully funded, and most significantly, even though it is not a huge amount of money , he was 85 million, was devoted to project initiation documents for the coming years. It is the first step in getting a project off of a long lead time planning list into motion and will potentially be deliverable in the next five to six years. The housing component was dealt with in a side bill, a. B. 110, or 101, im sorry. It largely provides general Fund Resources for housing and homelessness. It provides funding for incentives for cities and counties to develop pro housing policies, and interestingly enough, as you may recall dating back to the last session and continues this session, there had been a desire to some members of the legislature and later by Governor Newsom to try to tie. Chairman brinkman to tie s. B. One. The final bill allows an increasingly regular rigourous series of penalties to be imposed and sought by the attorney general and cities that are not compliant with the housing element. And the ultimate penalty would be the ability, if they not able to pay the penalties, that the state would have the authority to intercept these funds. However, it would not apply to any state and local funds for which there is constitutional protections such as s. B. 1. That is off the table for now. Finally, two bills to update you on. A. B. 1487, which is mr. Chus Housing Finance bill for the bay area. It is a watch in your table. It was recently amended to exclude from the list of eligible taxes the sales tax option for funding the program. That is out of the bill at this point in time. I think that is how the bill will move forward. They have set the authorization for a november 2020 election date, so what ever combination of taxes are agreed upon by the group that they all have the authority to go forward to the ballot. Finally, a. B. 1142, which is a bill that would add t. N. C. Trip data to Sustainable Community strategy elements of the various counties in this the state, we still are pressing for, in coordination with m. T. C. And m. T. A. , to have the author include local agencies as recipients of the data so we can synthesize how that would influence our Sustainable Community strategy. With that, i bring my presentation to a close and im happy to answer questions if i can. Thank you. Thank you for your work. Are there any questions or comments from commissioners . Is there any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Go race to sacramento. Is there a motion to move our support for senate bill 277 . Motion made by commissioner mandelman, and seconded. Do we have a different house . Were you here same house, same call. The resolution is adopted. Mr. Clerk, please read items five and six together. Item five is major Capital Project update, better Market Street, information item. Item six, approval find exchange of a proximally 3. 3 million in one bay Area Grant Fund from the elementary safe routes to School Project with an equivalent amount of prop k. Funds from the better Market Street project, and allocated a proximally 3. 8 million in prop k. Funds including the Exchange Funds with conditions to the project. This is an action item. The beginning of a banner day for district three. Miss smith, the floor is yours. Good morning. April smith, transportation planner at the Transportation Authority here to present this item today. For background, the project was approved by the board with 3. 41 million bay area grant from the metropolitan Transportation Commission. Also, during the 2019 prop k. Five your Prioritization Program update, the Board Program 436,000 and local match to the funds which will be funding the construction phase. Federal funds federal funds come with requirements including strict Fund Requirements established by m. P. C. , with the intent of encouraging kindly project delivery and avoiding federal funds, a loss of federal funds to the region. We are proposing an exchange of 3. 366 million in funds from the project with an equivalent amount of prop k. Funds from the better Market Street project, which i will describe in the next few slides. The project is at 95 design and public works will be ready to advertise the construction project in september. The project has seen a 12 month delay due to a prolonged process in obtaining the rightofway certification from caltrain which is a requirement for federal highways. Public works missed the obligation deadline for the funds, which put the funds at risk of being lost to the project. The benefits of the Fund Exchange would be that it would federalize the project, avoiding federal further delays, and would enable the project to complete design and meet the construction schedules. As you will hear in the next presentation, the better Market Street project is in the environmental phase with his final certification anticipated in december. The federal build grant triggered this from caltrain to the federal Transit Administration. Adding these funds which are administered by the federal Highway Administration to the project would enable public works to obtain caltrans. [indiscernible] public works is requesting a concurrent allocation of 3. 8 million which includes the 3. 366 million in prop k. Exchange funds and 436 million from the prop k. Funds program to the local match. The recommended allocation is conditional upon the board and Commission Approvals. We anticipate that the commission will consider the item in september. The project will improve thinking and taking transit to school. It will be open for use in december of 2020. Christina will give an update on the better Market Street project thank you. Any questions for mr. Smith relative to the Fund Exchange . If not commissioner yee . Just a quick question around the project. Go ahead. So construction looks like it will take place in 2019, october of this year. Yes, i will bring marcia forward, the project manager up to answer these questions. Hello. Im with the San Francisco public works. Were hoping to break ground in september. We are allowing a year and a half or construction and so it should be open in december of 2020. Okay. My question is, because this is heavily used by students around the neighborhood to go to school and around that corridor, what kind of precautions, i guess or extra traffic monitors what is your plans to deal with more confusion and for the kids to get across the streets safely . It is primarily traffic calming. We have a bulb out at the intersections, and essentially that shortages shortens the traffic crossings for people. We are also looking at we have m. T. A. On board and we look at the intersection as a whole to make sure that as we create the bulb out remove the pedestrian signals and, you know , other, you know, items that work for the entire intersection. I think what commissioner yee is asking, is what steps are you taking during construction to ensure ingress and egress in the safest manner. Is it with traffic monitors, are there going to be crossing guards to take kids across the street . What we do is we work with m. T. A. And we have a complete traffic routing package. What that package does is it works with the entire project and it figures lane closures, how to do everything. It also could have policeman on the corners and, you know, whatever is needed to always provide access. The whole goal would be to always provide access and safety for pedestrians. Can you be a little bit more direct . Are they going to be additional monitors out there making sure that kids are crossing safely during construction . What i can do for more information is give you the traffic routing package that would literally lift all the items. What we are looking at and what we would be doing. I would be happy to see that. I live around the corner. Okay. , good. Thank you. Okay. All right. How about an update on better Market Street . Good morning, commissioners. And i will speak first. Thank you. I am the Deputy Director for policy and programming with the Transportation Authority. Im happy to provide that information on the traffic mitigation and ensuring safe crossings for the children or accessing school, especially because of construction will be underway during the school year. I also did want to highlight that we cannot start spending the prop k. Funds on this project until m. T. C. Approves the Fund Exchange. That is slated for the commission in september. It might not be until october that the project i was under the understanding it was going out for bid, but if it is going to actually be breaking brought breaking ground with construction prep work in october we will also get you a more refined schedule on what that looks like based on the Commission Approval date. Thank you. Better market. Good morning, commissioners. Im with San Francisco public works and the better market state project manager. I just have a few slides to give you a quick update on the project. A quick reminder of what the crosssection looks like. Our project schedule, currently we are in environmental clearance. We are on the calendar for the Planning Commission on october 10th for a final certification of our Environmental Impact report. Following that, we will have our project approval by the director of public works, as well as the m. T. A. Board. Our schedule is to have clearance by the end of this year in december of 2019, and as april mentioned, the fund swap for the project will help us keep this schedule for clearance which is key because immediately following the clearance, we will implement some early improvements along Market Street , namely the turn restrictions that restrict private vehicles from using market between stuart and van ness, as well as the munimobile only lanes extending them, and making them munimobile only. Our key date is advertising our first phase of construction in march of 2020. That is between fifth and eightt street. One of the things that we have done since the last quarterly update to the commission is we hosted two open houses at the act costume shop on Market Street. We had over 200 people sign in and we think well over 200 people attended. We first off announced the phase one a. Project, the construction project. We solicited or requested input from the public on our urban design features and we also presented a design alternative on Market Street between hayes and goss which creates even more improvements around centred on market and van ness but extending from hades all the way to goss. I mentioned the early ample mentation elements of the project. The turn restrictions as well as the munimobile only lanes. All of the red arrows on the slide represent new private vehicle term restrictions. That is above and beyond which was implement it four or five years ago. Another key aspect of the project that we are in is the bikeway separation. We are testing different materials, different geometries of delineator his two alternatives to truncated domes which will separate the sidewalk level bikeway from the pedestrian area. It must be detectable by foot for those who are blind or low vision. It must be our intent is not to have people cross the separation material but in the event that you that we do, we have to make sure the people in mobility devices can make it over seyfried safely. We are wrapping up that study this week. We will be having site visits an open houses to collect all of the necessary input and we are hoping it will be updated if the fund swap is approved. This also does not show the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Contribution to the project. We are working with them right now to determine their share of the project and we will add that into our next update as well. We have talked about these before and our other potential Funding Sources, both federal and state, as well as regional and local Funding Sources that we are looking to to fund the full implementation of better Market Street between stuart and octavia. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner fewer . Thank you very much. My question just is about this funding and where is the second phase in line with the funding for better Market Street . Because i think we made a commitment to the second phase way before we made a commitment to better Market Street. So is this interfering with any of the funding that could be geared projected towards a second phase of the gary b. R. T. . Why are we starting two huge projects that funding one of them that was actually voted on even before i came into office . Thank you. Commissioner fewer, that is a great question. Both projects are of high priority to the city. For geary street, we do have 30 million in prop k. In this current fiveyear plan, and after m. T. A. Completes the design phase, the socalled conceptual engineering phase, we would be putting more money on that as well a seeking entry into the federal Transit Administration program for small starts. By agreement with m. T. A. In the region, the idea is to seek f. D. A. Core capacity, a different pot of somewhat related f. D. A. Funds for better Market Street. They are both priorities. This project, the initial phase of which that we are talking about right now is for the first three blocks of the entire corridor. It is slightly a bit ahead as far as the Design Effort and the smaller projects, but the gary pieces on the heels and i think it is very important that we take your direction to m. T. A. To ensure that design phase completes timely and we can seek the federal funds for phase two. Okay. So my question is, basically, that we are funding these two huge, big transportation projects within San Francisco, and the bart was actually voted on by this committee before we approve the better Market Street so my question is, i dont understand why we are not concentrating our funds into one huge transportation project that we are going to be having. Looks as though it is advancing way farther than even the second phase of the gary b. R. T. The first phase is under construction. So the first phase is better Market Street and this first three block state segment. And the second phase, which is another 300 milliondollar portion of the project, is on its way to seeking the federal funds. I would say that it is slightly ahead in that respect in that the first phase is under construction in the second phase is on its way to seeking the federal fund, but you are right. They are moving in tandem, the e. I. R. Is being cleared for better market, where is unk gary , we approved and adopted it several years ago. Theres a longer and more complicated Design Effort for the 2mile stretch of the outer phase two segment in the richmond, where as this three block segment is just a very small portion of the entire better Market Street corridor, which will take many years and probably just go on for several years, even beyond second phases of gary. I heard in the presentation that you are seeking federal funds for better Market Street. You are telling me that you are seeking funds for the bart second phase and then also better Market Street. I think my concern is just that we are starting these projects where we really dont have the funding, and i know that Market Street will have much more attention put on it because it is the center of our downtown area. However, i dont want the bart project to be put on a back burner and actually, i mean, when were talking about queueing up, being behind the queue of better Market Street. Better Market Street is something we just recently approved. The second phase of the b. R. T. Was approved when i wasnt even on this board yet, so i just think that when were talking about queueing it in priority, i dont want us to forget our commitment to the west side. Indeed. Thank you for the direction. Thank you. Duly noted. Commissioner haney . Thank you, chair peskin. Can you go to the first slide where it showed the timeline . Yes. It is up. So for the pieces that are around the turn restrictions, when will those happen . You will see those in early 2020, either january or february , depending on when we get our clearance, and then m. T. A. Will be ready to submit all the work orders to install the signs and the striping changes. And what are the clearances that are required for that that require us to wait for six months . It is part of our Environmental Impact report from ceqa. We need ceqa clearance. It is part of the project description in the federal clearance, so that is why we need that clearance. And we need the project approval from the director of public works and the m. T. A. Board. Those are the four things we need in order to implement any of the better Market Street improvements. Right. Will there be other shortterm improvements before 2020 . You mentioned this short area of a pilot around some of the changes around bikes. Yes. The bikeway pilot is between on market between franklin and goss it is where we have a 2inch race and a four and raise bikeway right now. We will make it we will increase it to 6 inches and make it sidewalk level. That is a pilot of the bikeway design. Theres also a couple of locations where we will be able to create painted safety zones because of the turn restrictions that are being implemented. Those are the key early implementation elements. And for the phase one in 2020 , the summer between fifth and eighth, can you talk a little bit more about what those changes will be . Sure. That is the full better Market Street project, complete redesign from building phase two building phase. It is 120 feet wide. You will see new accessible sidewalks, and by accessible, that will mean replacing the brick with a larger paver with fewer joints, which will be easier to travel along. You will see all of the Street Furniture, including the trees and the path of gold in that furnishing zone that varies between six and 10 feet. Right now the Street Furniture goes all the way out to the curb and takes a much larger area. Even the bike share stations will all be neatly within that furnishing his own. It will create that delineation between the pedestrian area and the bikeway. There will be a new sidewalk level bikeway that is, typically 8 feet wide from stewart to octavia. Right now it stops at eighth street. We will also create a small 4 foot buffer between the bikeway and the roadway. The roadway itself will still be two lanes in each direction but it will be a completely new roadway, new asphalt, new track, new track way, new overhaul new overhead lines, a completely redone Market Street. Thank you. Okay. Seeing no other questions from commissioners, are there members of the public would like to testify on items five and or and or six . Please come forward. Good morning, commissioners. I am a Senior Community organizer the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition and vice chair of the better Market Street Community Working group. Im here to express our strong support for the switch in funds and a location with the end result of funding Market Street for an additional three and change million dollars. I really believe that better Market Street is the most important Capital Project in San Francisco for the safety of people walking or biking. Market street is our busiest streets were people writing, but right now, if you ride inbound from eighth, there is no dedicated bicycle infrastructure it is a painted area on the ground. There are thousands of daily bicycle riders that have to share a travel lane with large vehicles and bus traffic. It is very dangerous. And not surprisingly, Market Street is on our high internetwork and one of the top three most dangerous corridors for people walking or biking in San Francisco. This project, with side lot sidewalk level bicycle lanes, automobile restrictions, and a host of Pedestrian Safety amenities would make Market Street a safe record or for all. There are hurdles to implementation. One of them being funding. This will keep coming back here. I will continue to look to you, our commissioners, for leadership on getting this project built and in the ground. Thank you. Seeing no other members of the public on these items, Public Comment is closed. Do we have a motion to approve the aforementioned Fund Exchange motion made by commissioner brown, seconded by commissioner mark. We have the same house, same call. The resolution is approved. Mr. Clark, next item please. Al qaeda proximally 11. 8 million in proper tax funds and 618 million in prop a. A. Vehicle Registration Fee funds with work with conditions. This is an action item the first of the two request from bart is for the modernization project. This is the second prop k. Fund. There was a prior allocation last year. This fulfils and intend to allocate that the board approved at that time. The project is really going to reconfigure the station, it will move some of the fair gates and increase the functionality and the security and the capacity of the station and so bart is coordinating with m. T. A. There is a separation wall between central subway and the Palace Station and the agencies are coordinating agreements for the purchase and location of the new gates. As the chair of the Citizens Advisory Committee mentioned, there had been some concern by t. A. Staff, particularly about the High Percentage of costs that were going to be borne by Construction Management activities. We have worked with staff to clarify that, you know, this is a very tightly constrained working environment, this and the embarcadero station are two of the busiest stations on the line and there are additional life safety requirements because there are higher tech volumes. The construction will be during and alford after revenue service, so we needed to ensure minimal disruption to passenger flow. This pertains to this project as well as the embarcadero station project, which i will get to any moment. This has led to higher than typical Construction Management costs in San Francisco. We typically see somewhere between 15 and 30 . Originally these were in the magnitude of 50 to 60 . Bart has revisited the Construction Cost estimate and actually increased the construction contract estimate to reflect the current Market Conditions with a limited number of bidders in San Francisco and also a lot of work in San Francisco. So the percentage for the soft cost has actually gone down. The embarcadero station, this is one bay area grant project like this project. This is prop k. Funding that will be complementing that federal grant that you have provided and also the scope of work is to procure and install a new elevator at the station. This will be a bart elevator. The existing elevator will provide service to munimobile passengers, but it will also provide for a redundancy should one of the elevators be out of service. Next request is for the downtown Ferry Terminal. Prop k. Has funded the design phase of this project and this is for separated pedestrian area between the south end of the Ferry Terminal and the new passenger emergency staging plaza for the south terminal. This would be providing safe access and separating the cars and pedestrians for folks accessing the ferry service. The next request is for the emf streetcar extension to aquatic park. The project would fund two portions of work, if you will. The first would be an opportunity for Needs Assessment that would be basically producing a report on the overall cost benefit analysis of the project, and this would be to provide the board with information, and other stakeholders, to inform decisions about the transit priorities of the city going forward. Once task one is finished, there will be a presentation by m. T. A. To the board on the outcomes of this analysis and then Public Participation and Stakeholder Engagement would then follow. We will also be coordinating with m. T. A. On the connect s. F. Effort. The next request is for the rehab. It is essentially a rebuilding of five streetcars that m. T. A. Owns. These are double entered double ended vehicles. Their operating cabs at both end of the vehicles so they can operate bidirectionally. This will increase safety, reliability, service, and allow for vehicles to be put into service for an estimated 25 years. The funds are coming from a 30 foot vehicle replacement project that m. T. A. Is delaying pending outcome of studies on alternative fuel and vehicle projects. Lets see. This project is the first of the vehicles projects that we have negotiated with m. T. A. An enhanced protocol for oversight, and this is stemming from the light rail vehicles project. There will be an oversight protocol in place for that project as well and so it will allow for increased communication and oversight by agency and with m. T. A. Next request is for both prop k. And prop a. A. Funds for a public works paving project. These funds will fully Fund Construction for nearly 40 blocks in the city and about 70 curb ramps, a variety of straightforward paving work that will benefit street users. The next request is for central richmond Traffic Safety central richmond Traffic Safety, so this will be implementing improvements on streets with a history of high injury collisions and where children and seniors and people with disabilities are walking or cycling. It is a key target area and it advances the goals of a new yet to be launched Traffic Calming Program called the advancing equity for safer Streets Program the amendment is to pull funds from that programmatic line in the fiveyear plan and to fully fund this project. There are improvements that are listed in your enclosure to your packet that provide Additional Details to list out the locations that are shown in the map on your screen for folks watching at home as well. Next request is for ocean avenue safety improvements. This is to improve safety and accessibility and comfort for people travelling along ocean avenue and geneva avenue between city college and balboa park station. It will take the recommendations and all of the work that has been done from the planning departments ocean avenue corridor design study and advance them. It will do Additional Data collection and analysis and some outreach stemming from the work that has already been done and conceptual engineering to produce a recommended list of nearterm and longterm improvements so that and these will be produced in a final report by the m. T. A. The bikeway, this is for design of a separated bike lane between market and folsom, the scope of work, street marking signs, single work signal modification to facilitate the bikeway as well. This is for the developed design phase of the project. Nestor . Next request is for vision zero quick build implementation. This is the program that the m. T. A. Has been advancing over the last few months to really get these quick build projects in the ground as soon as possible to advance safety and advance the goal of vision zero in San Francisco. The projects are mostly reversible or they are adjustable enhancements for treatments, rather. It is like Traffic Control and like roadway and curb paint and signs, and signal timing and transit boarding islands, these painted safety zones and bike lanes and adjustments to parking to facilitate safety can be implemented as soon as possible by inhouse staffing. So m. T. A. Would like to sustain this funding level and this level of work for the next few years. We are recommending funding in this current year with funds from the sixth Street Safety project, which is now going to be fully funded with Development Impact fees and a state grant as well. The next two years, we are recommending advancing funds from the out here of the prop k. Programs. Theres a Strategic Plan amendment to make this. M. T. A. Would come back to request those funds. To . 5 million in year two and 2. 3 million and year three. We have been made aware that there is a project that is one of the projects on the list of corridors that has actually advanced in construction. This is the Taylor Street quick build project. Theres about 400,000 that might be able to be reprogrammed to a substitute project that m. T. A. Would be working to identify on the high injury network. It there there will be quarterly reporting to the board on the delivery of this program. This is to fund the phase i paving, the rock rapid project paving treatment. This is the paving portion of the scope of work. This is the hairball intersection, if you will. These are additional funds that the board was made aware of that were needed to fully fund the project and to fund the retaining wall that was identified as necessary during the design phase of work. This will cover that scope. The last project is the vision zero coordinated bulb project. These are to install corp curb ramps on corners that are really hard to get. They are over sidewalk basements , so there is additional treatments in addition to the curb ramps that are necessary so there is a raised crosswalk and bulb out. This is why the project is on the pricier side for installing curb ramps. And additional location at california and height, which is not funded by the scope, by this request, but it will advance through the project. With that, i can answer any questions. Thank you. That was 18 milliondollar mouthful. Commissioner brown . Thank you. Just have a few questions as i was looking through this. Im just looking at the quick build allocation. So you had mentioned there was a project on taylor that has been completed ahead of time, so there is actually more money there that could be used so we are not retroactively asking for these fundings. Is that what you are saying . That is correct. I just wanted to clarify that. Can you tell me, maybe i missed it, were there any quick build projects in district five . I dont believe that there was a district five location that was identified at this point. They might be identified through either a substitution effort, potentially like with the save taylor funds, or there are spot improvements. There was a pot of funds in this allocation that would be used to fund hi collision areas with spot treatments. Right. Is there an area is a reason why there was no request from district five office, or can you tell me why . Let me bring up the director of livable streets to address how the projects were identified in terms of identifying the projects, i wanted to mention two things. First is the allocation wouldve line of enforcement that would fund will city why that has been requested by members of this body. The second thing i think is this is the first of many for years of this program. We were scrambling to put this together in the last couple of months. We picked the projects that were ready to go right now. As it happened, this is where this project was. As we come back for future years , we will have more time to prepare and make sure weve a better spread of projects for subsequent allocations. Im just a little concerned because i have have five pedestrian deaths. That is 30 of the city of pedestrian deaths which is in district five. I would really love it if you would really seriously look at some projects in district five that we can use that money. We would love to sit down with your office and identified the quick build projects in district five. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other questions from commissioners . Seeing none, is there Public Comment on this item . If there are other speakers, if you will line up to my left, youre right. I am with the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. Theres a lot of really great stuff here. I want to express our support for several in particular. The central richmond Traffic Safety project, the ocean avenue safety improvements, the bikeway , a really awesome project, the Quick Build Program , and the hairball improvements. I do want to speak specifically to the quick build implementation program, though. A couple months ago in may, this body approved a resolution compelling city agencies to work harder towards vision zero and faster. This is the result of that work. I want to thank this body but also commends the sfmta on their work towards number of projects that are crucial to the safety of people walking and biking. Already we have seen taylor go into the ground, that is a 31 road diet on in the tenderloin, one of our dangerous streets. This afternoon, we will be looking at approvals for sevente lanes, another one on the quick build list. We are moving at an unprecedented rate. It is very exciting. It will take more funding so we really hope that you approve this today. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Good morning, commissioners. I am from walk San Francisco. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. As charles said, we have an obligation in thanking you all for putting the pieces in place that we have vision zero to be realized. This year we have not been on the best path. I do want to reiterate we have ten people and one person on a bike who has died already this year and we are only six months into the year. We have asked m. T. A. To be as nimble and flexible as possible in the quick build approach. It is definitely we are seeing that. As charles mentioned, Taylor Street is already in the ground. That project was passed in 2018 and we wouldnt have seen anything happen in 2020 or 2021. This is something that walk San Francisco highly supports. Beyond the quick builds, we believe this 5 million is also important to continue what they call the spot treatments, and i like to think of it as basic maintenance. This is refreshing the zebra crosswalks, the daylighting that you have supported, Pedestrian Safety zones, and other features that this constantly needs maintenance and refreshing. It is critical to the safety needs. This goes citywide to every district. I do want to express that this is districtwide, the spot improvements are definitely necessary. Walk San Francisco pledges that we will be working with the sfmta so they have a plan to prioritize safety maintenance and quick build projects in every district. Thank you. Seeing no other members of the public for this item, Public Comment is closed. With that, colleagues, seeing no further questions, is there a motion to approve this item . Made and seconded. Colleagues, we have the same house, same call. The resolution is adopted. Mr. Clerk, we are at 10 54 a. M. And we have a press conference downstairs at 11 00 a. M. Do we do you think we can do item number 8 in 6 minutes . Or seven minutes . Okay. Good afternoon, commissioner. I am with San Francisco Transportation Authority. Today i will be presenting on the intersection safety study recommendation and this is an action item to adopt the final report. For this study, we have selected a temporary intersection for safety improvements and recommended say safety improvements that can be implemented in nearterm and as Capital Improvements. This study is funded by caltrans planning with match and all those the selected intersections are in vision zero network. Here are our ten studies of the intersections. First two are in mission and south van ness. The six of them are in six, seventh, and eighth street and two of them are in rankin hill area. Once we selected the ramp intersections, we did an existing transition analysis and we found that more than half of the collisions are vehicle to vehicle and a third of the collisions include users. We also found that in many of the intersections, vehicles blocked the crosswalks where pedestrians have to weave through them to get to the other side of the crosswalk or have long distances do cross as well as a lack of poor pedestrian signals. Once we have looked at the existing collision, we did an analysis what allows the analysis, which is the left diagram. We identify where the collision happened and the parties involved. Based on this analysis, we have recommended improvements for all different intersections. In this example, this is eighth and brian. We have opened it up opened up the crosswalk and improved lane designation across the intersection. During the outreach process, we have heard great feedback and design suggestions to include in our final recommendation. We have reached out to 70 Community Groups mean so much, met with different stakeholders and advocated and advocated a multi language survey where we received many responses. As well as design suggestions on our draft recommendation during open house. The design suggestion includes flashing beacon signs, additional curveball belts, advanced stop outs and we included them in our final recommendation. The recommendation includes nearterm and Capital Improvements. Nearterm improvements can be implemented in the next two years in Capital Improvements in the next five years with caltrans, depending on caltrans approval. We also developed a funding plan to fund these recommended improvements. Commissioner haneys office, with approval of this board, already allocated these funds to implement five of the intersections. And some of the other Funding Sources, we have developed a developer funds, city funds, and grant opportunities to implement this recommendation. With that, i am open for any questions. Thank you. Are there any questions from members . Commissioner haney . Thank you. Thank you for this presentation and this work. Im very excited about it and happy that we were able to be supportive of these funds. In terms of prioritization around the nearterm improvements, how are you choosing where to start and which intersection that is the most high need, or what is the immediate next steps . We have identified the nearterm improvements that are lowcost low cost and easy to implement in the next two to three years where the Capital Improvements will include more curb work and some of the more involved approval processes. One way that is one way we are prioritizing different improvement funds. In terms of intersection, we have not looked at, you know, which one will go first or second, it is just depending on what funding is available and what matches best with the costs that we have developed. [please stand by] its 2018, and we saw several fatalities at these intersections where the freeway touches down, and this is desparately one of those areas that needs heightened improvement. So we support this. Thank you. Chairman thank you. Seeing no other members of the public on this item, Public Comment is closed. Is there a motion to adopt the study, the final report made by commissioner ronan and seconded by commissioner yee. And we have a roll call, please. [roll call] we have first approval. Chairman we will now reconvene the Transportation Authority Commission Meeting for today, july 9, 2019. Mr. Clerk, would you please, and i apologize for this call, item number 10, out of order, which sa district 3 item because i have to go to the groundbreaking for the new