Approved. Thank you very much. The minutes are adopted. Since commissioner reed is here, we will move on to item four. Item four, recommend five members transit citizens Advisory Committee. We have Transportation Planner here on this item. Good morning commissioner. This item is for the appointments to the gearry corridor Advisory Committee. Initiative to improve travel time reliability and streetscape along the gearry corridor. Its currently in Environmental Review phase. The structure is shown in your memo which is on page 17 of the packet. Five of those 13 members are currently up for appointment because of approximately two years ago. There was board initiated two year terms for those members. Members currently in the structure are shown in the memo in attachment on page five. Five members represent several different seats as there are theres one appointment for seat for the richmond district. One that is a representative of the fillmore area, one a representative of the tenderloin downtown district. Two at large seats. Four of those existing members are seeking reappointment. There is no current member seeking reappointment for one of the at large seats. We do have addition to the members seeking reappointment to the application for the individual neighborhood base seats and all of the applicants for any of the neighborhood seats are also eligible for that at large seat. Weve encouraged all of the applicants to who are here today in order to express their interest and say a few words about their candidacy. Some of them are here today. As a reminder, staff did not recommend candidates. We just provide the information that they have provided in their application. We are seeking a recommendation to appoint five members. So, thank you. Thank you very much. Do we have any questions from our Community Members . Seeing none, just to reiterate, we have several reappointment, new one new appointee. I at this time i will open it up to the applicant who here. If you can come here up if you can state if youre a new appointee. Who are the people seeking reappointment . Sure, for the richmond district, joe anna fong and benjamin horn. Thank you very much. All right, thank you very much. At this time, if would like to line up on the side of the wall here and again, please state your name which seat youre applying for and whether youre reappointment, thank you very much. Dont be shy. Come on up, please. My name is cindy ive been resident of the gearry corridor since 1990. I feel like i know pretty every inch of the gearry corridor. During that time, the last 25 years, i only owned a car for ten. The first part of this i was primarily a muny rider. More recently in the last 12 years, ive been a committed bike commuter. But i use all the forms of transportation. Thats my ive been tracking this project for a long time. It seems to me that the biggest opposition is actually some of the gearry businesses, Small Businesses who fear being injured by the construction. Any way, thats my experience. Thank you. Just one question and this goes for all of the applicants who are here today. If you can state why you like to serve in this capacity, what are some of the things that you like to achieve if youre able to be appointed to the cac. Well, i see theres a need for this project. Im really interested in helping, trying to help get it implemented. I would love to be involved in citizen capacity in the mta. Ive done some work with the Bicycle Coalition and the m. T. A. I just think its really important. All right. Thank you. Any questions from Committee Members . Next applicant please. Hi, good morning commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today. My name is peter, i had the privilege of serving on the gearry Advisory Committee for the past two years. As a representative of the tenderloin downtown neighborhood. Im here seeking reappointment today to the committee. A little bit about me, ive lived at the corner of height and gearry in district six for the past six years. I do not own a car and so i rely on Public Transportation to get around the city. I take the 38 gearry very often. Its the closest line to my apartment. Im often on it getting to and from home. Professionally, i work as a Public Outreach consultant for a small environmental Marketing Company and prior to that, i worked at the San Francisco department of the environment on Sustainable Transportation projects and programs. While in the committee, one of my focus areas has been Public Outreach to the tenderloin community. Ive worked with the Transportation Authority staff to identify communitybased organizations to build a bridge and engage more with the community on the project. Ive also done direct outreach to businesses along the gearry corridor making them aware of the Community Outreach offense that the t. A. Has organized over the past two years. Again engage the community. Ive also been strong advocate for Pedestrian Safety improvements along the corridor particularly in the inner gearry portion where we know we have the highest pedestrian injures. I like to continue my active engagement with the committee as well as with the community. I like to ensure that the project stays on time and on budget and also work with the t. A. And city officials to make sure we secure funding for the project. Would also want to continue to advocate the phasing in of the project so benefits can be benefited now. Great, thank you for your presentation. Thank you. Next applicant please. Good morning commissioners and thank you for this opportunity it speak. My name is benjamin horn, ive lived in district five for about the past ten years. I served in the last two years on the gearry tcac. I learned a lot about the project and learned about the role of the cac. My objectives is being part of the committee are to speaks a representative of district five but also to provide a voice to someone who lives and works nearby the projects. To increase safety for everyone. Includes on the buses as well as in the neighborhoods and around the bus stops. Increase efficiency for the projects. Which is one of the main project goals. My like to ask that you appoint me to continue on the gearry cac. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your presentation. Colleagues, any questions or comments from the applicants . I dont see any other applicants here. Okay, with that, im going to go to Public Comment first and take some questions and comments from Committee Members. Public comment on item number four. Item number four. Ill begin, bus transit citizen, committee. The past two applicants, they are well qualified. They are well outspoken. Thank you. Any other members of the public who wish to speak on item four . Public comment is closed. Now colleagues, do we have any recommendations or thoughts on gearry members . Commissioner breed. Thank you, i definitely think that its important to have continuity on this particular committee and i think that the person who represents district five has been doing a really excellent job as well as peter who has served as a representative for district six. I would like to make a motion that we move forward with the existing individuals who are currently serving on this committee and i like to hear my colleagues thoughts on what we should do about the at large seat since we have not had a number of the candidates come here today before the committee to speak. All right, thank you. We will entertain that motion. Commissioner farrell. Thank you chair tang. Just to be clear, we have one vacancy in richmond and one in tenderloin downtown and two at large that we have to fill. Look, completely concur with supervisor breed and mr. Horn in their continuity. In terms of open around the richmond district, i think the atlarge seat, i know district two has been on there as atlarge member. Elliott talbot, i dont believe he was here today, i spoke with him about it. I would like to certainly given that we have two vacancies and three applicants, i would definitely support him going forward. I gotten to known him a little bit and think he would be very involved and have a great perspective there and take Public Transportation downtown to work every single day. Hes a big advocate. Thank you commissioner farrell. He has made his recommendation about the atlarge seat with mr. Elliott talbot. Commissioner christensen. I want to echo about the thoughts of the current members. I know ben horn personally. Im very pleased that both of them came down here today. Any time somebody agrees to participate in the civic process is a wonderful thing. I appreciate all of those who are serving now and who have come forward with an interest to serve. I can speak of the list that we have available to cathy has kate lazarus who lives in richmond and works downtown and is a frequent user and is an exceptional young professional. I agree with commissioner breed, i did some checking with the staff and other people that work with the cac, all of them speak very highly of the persons currently serving. I think renewing those terms is an order especially all thats going on with the gearry brt. Commissioner yee . One of the questions i have of staff in regards to thank you mr. Horn and calotta being here. In regards to the current members, theyre reapplying. How have their attendance been . They have all been fairly attended meetings and participated in and been quite offered a lot of contributions to the cac. Thats important. Lot of times people apply for these things and they never show up. Im more than happy to support the four people that are currently in the seat and reapplying. In regards to the additional atlarge seat, i appreciate anybody that comes here to show theyre willingness to serve. I appreciate cindy for being here. Theres enough support to put her on as the additional atlarge seat. Great, thank you. Sounds like we have consensus on reappointments. I would definitely support that motion. We are definitely all over the map when it comes to the atlarge seat. Commissioner breed. I would also support ms. Baker for the atlarge seat as well if thats possible. Okay. Lets take first a motion i didnt realize ms. Baker was listed in richmond. As much as i mentioned mr. Talbot, i would fully support him, fair enough when people do show up to speak here, that should give preference. Im happy to support that motion. Great. Sounds like we have consensus here. Commissioner breed had made a motion supporting all the reappointments. Is there a second. Seconded by commissioner christensen. Theres consensus on appointing ms. Cindy baker to the atlarge seat. Do we have a motion and a second to that . Moved by commissioner yee and seconded by commissioner breed. I think if we can do a roll call vote since we have commissioner farrell with us. On item four, commissioner breed breed aye, commissioner christensen, aye, commissioner tang, aye, commissioner yee, aye. Item passes. Great congratulations to reappointees and cindy for the atlarge seat. All right, if we can call up item five nowc please. Item five, recommend allocation of 9,878,876 in prop k funds. Subject to fiscal year schedule. We have chad here, senior of Transportation Planner. Good morning chair tang. We have a total of 10 million in request for prop k allocation today that would leverage about 67. 9 million in nonprop k funds. First up is caltrans annual request for this San Francisco annual member share for the contribution of the caltran Capital Budget for fiscal year 15 and 16. Every year caltrans, like these for the annual Capital Budget, which is subject to reviewed discussion and negotiated by the three joint powers. Prop k funds from the Capital Improvement Program Category and caltran shares are used to help support San Franciscos annual local match contribution to caltrans capital program. Prop k funding for the caltrans category has been heavily advanced to provide San Francisco annual local match. Were also make a small advance for this years request over what we have programmed in the adopted 2014 Strategic Plan. That requires an amendment. Current programming in the prop k program in the current prop k Strategic Plan for caltrans runs out after fiscal year 22 and 23. These are the projects on the current slide that make up this years request from caltrans for the state of good repair program. I want to highlight two of these. The first is the napoleon bridge closure. These funds will be used for design. These structures have reached the end of their useful lives. Design is expected to be completed by december of 2016. The other project on this slide, train departure projects at the fourth and king station here in San Francisco and also in san jose to provide realtime information to passengers and this project will be open for use for passengers by july 2017. On the Fourth Street bridge settlement project in 2003 the San Francisco department of works contracted to retrofit for sizic stability. After construction the settlement between the contractor and the city was reached in which the contractor was received to 15 million, 2. 3 million was sfmta responsibility. They found 300,000 in other funds and prop k to make up the difference. The prop k funding will come from 6 million thats programmed in fiscal year 16 and 17 pap thats programmed to thats programmed to segment f. This request also requires an amendment to advance funds for this project. Another amendment to policy to allow these funds to be used for segment a instead of segment f of the project. Plan the next slide is a quintjerrold connector road. This request is part of an ongoing cooperation between the Transportation Authority, the city and the caltrans. First is to replace the bridge over quint street. Second is to facilitate a potential future caltrans station and third aimed is to construct a new street between quint street and jerrold avenue that will run along the west side. The right of way where the road would go is currently owned by union pacific. The Purchase Price has been negotiated. The negotiations with the railroad on the Purchase Agreement are ongoing. Bringing this request will allow the funds to be in place when escrow is set to close. The special conditions that are noted here on the slide, the they cover public works and city risks. Before you move on to the next slide, if you would mind smoking to the issue and concerns that were addressed earlier. I will bring up the Deputy Director for policy and programming. Good morning. Deputy direct. The concerns that cac chair expressed in regards to the special conditions that applied what happens if escrow fails to close or what happens if escrow closes and the city purchases the property and project. In the case of escrow failing to close for whatever unforeseeable reasons occurred during escrow, the prop k funds would come back to the prop k program. If the project does not proceed after escrow closes after a period of about two years or two years is what we have in the condition and the Transportation Authority has deemed the project as not likely to proceed for whatever unforeseeable reason, we would ask the city to sell the property. The amount of funds that will be returned to the prop k program will be the less of the Purchase Price or the amount of prop k funds to acquire the property. Or whatever the city can sale the land less the cost. Okay, thank you for that clarification. The next project on the next slide is equipment for public works. This request it looks familiar. This is an annual request that comes from public works. Its to replayer cleaning equipment. You can see some of the specific pieces of equipment on the slide here. Public works expects to complete for the equipment by the end of the calendar year. Have the complete procurement to have the equipment on the street by may of 2017. Another request that might look familiar, this is an annual request from the department of the environment. They submitted a request for about 80,000 in prop k to promote and administer San Franciscos benefit ordinance. The prop k could fund the program from october 2015 through september 2016. The commute benefit ordinance provides San Francisco employers the prop k will be used to offer consultations with employers that administer the ordinance, compliance, conduct outreach and maintain the commute smart hot line and update the compliance process. If i may ask, how has our the funding that weve allocated for. How has that translated into actual participation. I dont know if theres any sort of metrics. Actually, the compliance right now, we have about 80 compliance rate from businesses and were working this year to increase that number quite a bit. What are some of the things that i guess you might be doing differently in order to try to achieve better compliance rates . What we are doing is providing a lot more direct outreach, free consultation services. We run information through the business associations, any of the outreach channels that we have available to us that are specific to the businesses. Then weve also increased our participation rates because weve partnered with the Healthcare Security ordinance. They had the same threshold of employers. In the past, weve had outreach to their mailers. Additionally, the bay area has a new regional program. We have been communicating to them. We have multipronged approach to reaching out to employers. Great. From my understanding, its the last year in the department of environment is requesting these funds through prop k allocation . Thats correct. Great, thank you. The next project is the karr street multimodal implementation project. This project will build upon recommendations in the Transportation Authoritys chinatown which is approved by the board this past july. The requested funds will be used to plan and develop designs for current montgomery streets between market and broadway. The goal is to increase Pedestrian Safety. Well also enhance transit performance. Theres a bunch of bus routes that run through here. It also developed northsouth bicycle facilities in the corridor. This was identified as a key corridor in the 2013 bicycle strategy. The with that i will call my colleague, ryan, to talk about the last prop k request. Senior planner at the t. A. This final request relates to a Pilot Program we are working to initiate with bart. This came out of discussions with bart about how do we address the various congested deny conditions. Theres a lot of work on the way to develop longer recommendations. Its Short Term Solutions to address crowding. We are very interested in Successful Pilot that had been done in singapore where they offer incentives to riders to shift out of the peak record and they were able to track how well the incentives work by using their transit card data. We cork to scope a Similar Program for San Francisco. We applied for federal funds with that. We have a partnership with bart to get this under way. Were looking for prop k funds for the matching to help match the federal grant. We are looking to try to launch it in spring. Bart typically experiences a ridership bump in january. Were hoping to launch it around then or potentially later in the spring. It would run for about six months. Were looking to test this approach. Its essentially promising approach for managing congestion generally not just on bart but maybe other applications or transit. Operators and roadways in the long term. We look at this as an opportunity to test it and see how it works and how effective it is. Could potentially go from there if we see a success. Thank you, i think this is really interesting pilot. Can you speak i dont know if youre able to speak to some of the potential ideas for what the incentives might be for people to shift their travel patterns. We are looking at either the base reward would either be clipper card value or cash. Those are the two options. In singapore, they did provide transit card value but the card was much more flexible than ours. Well be doing surveys around bart to get a sense of if theres a strong preferences. Well test options with surveys around bart. I can go into more detail it is youre interested. Thank you. Any other questions . I think that concludes your presentation. Thank you very much. Commissioners do you have any questions or comments regarding the prop k request this time around . Okay, seeing none, we will open up item five to Public Comment. [inaudible] thank you very much. Any other members of the public wish to comment on item five. Public comment closed. Colleagues do we have a motion on this item . Motioned by commissioner yee to adopt item five. With that objection, it passes. Item six. This is an information item. We have maria lombardo, Deputy Directors of the t. A. Here. Good morning, im going to copresent this with our assistant Deputy Director for policy and program. There should be a powerpoint up on your screen. This one is a followup to the overview presentation that we gave ages ago, it was in july before recess plan bay area. Ly give ill give you a short recap. The focus is showing you our preliminary draft to guide our advocacy on plan bay area and also be draft list of the San Francisco project priorities that we will submit to the metropolitan transportation commission. In a nutshell, what is planned bay area . This is basically the long range Transportation Vision for the nine bay area counties, there are 100 plus jurisdictions and close to third different transit operators. Thanks to state legislators, the 2013 update is now called the Regional Transportation Plan sustainable communities strategy. It mandate to how its coordinated in this planning document. Two the really key sticks in that legislation has to reach state mandated target. We also have to accommodate all of the Housing Needs at all income levels. The basic elements of plan bay area are some goals and performance targets. Sort of getting to the nuts and boats what makes up the plan. Youll see policies recommended to investment of funds to feature revenue advocacy. There are grants programs that get shaped and molded in here. Particularly one in which m. T. C. Has controlled. One of the key deliverables is the financial constrained project list. One thing i want to clarify up front, while were conducting our call for project, this is not like a call for projects for the one bay area Plant Program where you ended up with a board adopted list of projects. This is more akin to what i say getting Fishing License. Youve gotten into plan bay area, which means youre allowed to go out and seek federal funds, it doesnt mean youll get it. You have a permit license. Its essential and can be leveraged into something later on. This particular update is the first update since sb375. While for San Francisco, merging the transportation side together, tend to be a little bit on the cutting edge, the rest of the regions sort of big huge effort. Folks still feeling the impact. The idea is that the plan bay area is updated every four years. This particularly area is a minor update. Theyre building on the framework what is currently in place. M. T. C. Is not changing the horizon. The last year the plan remains at year 2040. The focus is on updating the projects that are in there but also in a few areas, topics that didnt get adequately flushed out last time. Its hard to do everything one update. Those are showing up on the screen, ill come back and talk to them later. Im going to talk about briefly now, our proposed goal and objectives to guide our advocacy. Mostly these are pulled from our San Francisco transportation. Last plan bay area comments made and m. T. C. Commissioners. To try and keep this simple, weve divided those goal and objective into two categories. Financial and policy ones are here up on the page. The first one, amber will talk about more because it relates very much for the call for projects. As i said, plan bay area is your Fishing License to go after federal funds. Its sort of a level of strategy about all of the projects that need to be in this update until the next one is approved in 01. You 2 1 2021. Three and four on the screen, basically have to do with getting more money. The third one is trying to get a bigger share of San Francisco of the existing revenues. The fourth one is growing the pie. We need more revenues for transportation period. I will underscore something amber said in july, which is that were not adding years federal revenues continue to go down as compared to prior forecast. I do want to point out that the second policy objective, this is advocating strongly for more investment in transit. Our m. T. C. Commissioners made a really big deal during the last plan bay area update. It makes sense in this context as the three big cities, San Francisco, san jose and oakland. To be able to do that, we need to maintain our systems that we have and expand them. I wont go into a lot of detail about this. They are there and i will be happy to answer questions on attachment one. On the screen, are just a few examples of some of the new revenue advocacy of how these policies may translate into action. Two things ill note is again, while you dont get many coming on plan bay area, you can accomplish things that can later help you leverage your project in securing money. For the largest projects and projects that change roadway capacities or if youre doing a freeway management project where you get more approved, m. T. C. Performance evaluation. The top 10 or 15 or so, m. Its not the same as having a check going home. It does mean when you seek regional discussions, these are bragging rights. You can say were a top performer in the bay area. Its easier to get dollars. Last plan bay area probably two thirds of the plan bay area. We tend to do really well in this area. The green box just gives you an example of some of the policies we expect to come out of plan bay area. Some are less likely as others. We always want to be prepared. Lastly in my pilot presentation, up there you can see the main areas where we proposed nonpolicy related objectives. For example in terms of vion zero, we want to make sure all the m. T. C. Programs allows vision zero. They just mentioned, we support strongly based decisionmaking because our projects do well as opposed to a formula that returns forms. Lastly, equity is the high topic of this debate. Well come back to you with thoughts on this. It is a little bit tricky. This is still a part of Transportation Plan that were trying to achieve and influence land use. Just the examples of how we can do that in plan bay bay area. The region can provide Technical Assistance through jurisdictions throughout the region about how to develop and put into place antidisplacement policies. Lastly, with the one Bay Area Grant Program which well talk about, there are requirements administered eligible, theres a possibility of tieing on more strings on there saying in order to be eligible, jurisdiction needs to have six the following menu of ten antidisplacement programs of programs in place. What well change is the cost of the project. Amber will come up and talk to you about that. Good morning commissioners, amber Transportation Authority. This is the time line for the entire plan bay area process that m. T. C. Produced. You can see we are at that area where theres a bunch of activity going on. Basically our focus will be through mid2016 on this issue. With respect to the call for projects, theres three concurrent efforts going on now. The first is the call for projects at the county level which is what were going to talk about today. The second mtc asked the regional operators directly provide. Mtc also asked the regional tran set operators to provide their operating needs. Basically, mtc will take all of this input and build a financially constrained preferred scenario of programs and projects. Our county program is basically mtc has told us we have 8. 4 billion budget for local discretionary funds. Discretionary funds, we have a number of projects that has mtc committed funding. Its the extra money that allows the project to move forward. We dn anticipate that 8. 4 will go down a little bit. Well know more about that later in the year. Probably going to have to shave some of the funding off our final list of projects. What projects immediate to be in the rgp. Maria said, any project seeking federal, state or regional funding or federal action such as federal and environmental clearance approval has to be in the plan. Also projects that are large in capacity changing. Fortunately, most of the projects that we hear about everyday, traffic and Transportation Demand management, can be bundled in a programmatic category. We really looking at the big projects. Between may and july, we worked with public agencies and also solicited through comprehensive process with the whole city, family. We solicited ideas from members of the public by participating in a mtc workshop. Weve done an email blast and social media. We did one of the meetings with the neighborhood organizations and stakeholder groups to really get detailed input into what they were interested in seeing in the plan bay area. What we heard is very similar to what we heard in our outreach for the San Francisco plan a couple of years ago. Interest in social equity, public transit, bikes and ped project. We did hear from one stakeholder questions about our congestion management approval approaches. Wanting us to think about how San Francisco transportation relates to the region. Were not working on it alone. Interest in a transparent and inclusive process with followup. Then real focus on the length between transportation, Affordable Housing and displacement. In identifying the draft project priorities included in your packet, we first looked at what was last bay area. Projects dont typically get removed unless they are completed or canceled. Weve revised those process and what regional or local discretionary funding do they need to assign to the project to fund them. Then the exciting thing is the new projects. Working with the members of the public, looking at each project and determining does it need to be in the plan or can it be bundled in the problematic category. Is it in the San Francisco Transportation Plan, thats kind of the basis feed into what goes into plan bay area. Is it consistent with the policies and what planning process did it come out of that Public Outreach and level of technical advancement. In your packet are several lists, page 46 is list of existing plan bay area project that we propose to move forward. Page 50 through 52 are the new projects. Theyre f. Y. I. To give you a full picture of what is moving forward. Finally on page 55 is a list of programmatic categories. Right now were just kind of indicating what projects will be seeking local and regional discretionary funds. Were coming back for an action item next month. At the same time, planned bayer is a small portion of the planning. Right now weve been engaged a Long Range Planning effort developing a schedule and budget thats in coordination with the Planning Department, the Mayors Office and the m. T. A. There will be deliverables that will come out of that process over the next few years. The first will be a refresh of the San Francisco Transportation Plan. Address minor subject matter that we hadnt flushed out the last time. There will be a major update to the San Francisco Transportation Plan. That will take a longer look at the long term transportation land use division. How we prioritize transit and state of good repair. Our vision for demand management and how to share mobility and feed into our transportation system. Then, the third deliverable will be an update, the Planning Department will update its transportation element. As you know, theres a big push to do transit master planning in the city. This is happening now. Will be informed by several efforts going on now. M. T. A. Will capacity strategy the transit core capacity study. The rail yard boulevard study led by the Planning Department and then bart is also studying various things in the city. These are all going to feed into recommendations that can advance the planning conceptual engineering and environmental work on a number of Capital Projects before they can be included in the next plan bay area. Of course, this will be a robust Public Engagement process. This is very tiny but its kind of our map forward with the call for projects. Well be bringing the list with the numbers to you next month. M. T. C. Will 58 58 evaluate the projects. Come up with a preferred scenario in early 2016 and for adoption in 2016. With that, maria and i will be happy to answer any questions you have. Thank you so much for the thorough presentation. Colleagues any questions or comments . Commissioner christensen . I just want to make note in all of that information of an item of a special interest to my district. Im very happy to see the rail capacity study move forward. I think a lot of my colleagues agree its something we need to be taking a look at. Im very happy to see the central subway extension on that list. Well be looking forward to making some progress on that. Thank you for including it. Thank you very much. Any other questions or comments . Seeing none, well open up item six to Public Comment. [inaudible]. All right, any other members of the public wish to speak on item six. Public comment is closed. That was an information item. Well call touch item seven now. This is an information item. Amber with the Transportation Authority. Today i will providing you with abupdate on the obag program. It was one of the Grant Programs that came out of plan bay area to support the Greenhouse Gas emission goals that m. T. C. Had through its sb375. Its a five year grant program. The last cycle was 826 million. Its a significant chunk of money. Most of the funding comprises it are all the federal funding that m. T. C controls. You can see theres a number of different programs regional programs such as climate initiatives, transit programs, regional operations which includes things like m. T. C. Three way performance initiative. 40 of the program was given back to the counties to program to a number of kind of selfselected county priority. In cycle one, the funding was distributed to counties by formula. Through production and planned house. 70 will be required to be spent. Priority development area. Which is selfselected areas that are anticipated to take the groove. Paving, transit, bike and ped. They have a really strict time use of funds requirement and lot of hoops you have to jump through. Its something we have to pay particular attention to in the process. For San Francisco, we got 38. 8 million over the five years. We set aside 2. 5 million for schools and the remainder for streetscape like projects. This map shows the projects that moved forward. You can see in the yellow there are the defined Party Development areas between investment and anticipated to happen. Funded two safe routes to school projects. Assigned some of the funding to a Streetscape Project that included six school components. We funded five Streetscape Projects across the city. Just to give you a flavor of the type of projects heres a couple rendering through chinatown, broadway, mansell, proposal if masonic and proposal for second street. Cycle one, status update as we move into the second cycle, kind of lessons learned, the first is that all the projects except for second street, has been obligated. Second street is moving forward on schedule this year. Four of the projects have experienced between six and nine months of delay. The rest have experienced modest or no delay. There are a number of reasons for that. We really trying to figure out how to accommodate those issues in the next round. Project readiness is really essential. Look into the reasons that led to project delay, first of all, there was higher than anticipated Agency Coordination requirements. Mostly with respect to pec but also a lot of issues with caltrans which is a critical partner in this process. Because we need federal environmental clearance, theres a lot more hoops to jump through there. Because its under caltrans, we thrown a lot of surprise requirements. Then finally, its very complicated to obligate the federal funding. Move into cycle two, setting one of the Big Questions is what do we want to see as project priorities. Last time we focused on safe routes to school. Again, these fundings can be spent on a lot of different things, we might want to focus on the same thing. Maybe we want to focus on transit, maybe we want to commit additional funding to plan and development area. Looking at project readiness with the eye of a lessons learned, better evaluate the project schedule thoroughly and potentially think about whether we want to fund a few large projects that can more efficiently go through the process or smaller projects. Last slide, this is just youre going to see update on cycle two next month. M. T. C. Is currently doing outreach with stakeholders with the policies and proposals for obag. They will be bringing that through their board in november. Then the projects beginning implementation in early 2017. Well bring an item to you next month and talk about obag two in much more detail. Well provide that update. Great, thank you for your presentation. Commissioner yee. Thank you chair tang. Thanks for the presentation. I want a clarification of your numbers. Couple of questions, the total is 38. 8. You have 33. 5 million. Move into 2. 5 million for safe routes. Only 1. 2 million is from obag. I dont get it. Yes. What was shown in the project total, theres also an increment of the obag funds that goes toward planning functions for the Transportation Authority. Most of it goes to project but a small portion goes toward five years worth of oversight and planning for the Transportation Authority. The safe route to school now, we did program 2. 5 million to safe routes to schools program. The rest of it was a component of chinatown chinatown broadway project. The whole thing is interesting. Any other questions or comments from Committee Members . I look forward to working with all of you for cycle two. I know that on the west side of town, lot of our neighborhoods are not part of the p das. I understand why the funding will go towards the other half of the city. I do look forward to seeing if there are ways we can leverage some of the funding. We that, seeing no other questions oar comments. Well open up item seven to Public Comment. Specifically about the plan bay area program. Chinatown. I go there everyday. Monday, tuesday, wednesday, thursday, friday, saturday and sunday. [inaudible] c item 10. Thank you very much, we are adjourned. This is september 14, 2015. The meeting time is this meeting is being televised soon to be live tonight and the Small Business commission thanks sf govtv staff for
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.