tv [untitled] May 14, 2012 11:30am-12:00pm PDT
they're ready to move forward, so the best place for you to get a look ahead is that the board adopted a five-year partition program to see what is ahead for the district. in many places they have placeholders. there is the general category and the ability to bring something forward in a particular district. in the next month, we have a lot of opportunities where we are counting on the board to engage sponsors about what they want to move forward on. commissioner avalos: thank you. if there are zero ono other ques or comments, we can go on to public comment. >> supervisors, some months ago, there was a supervisor who was here, no longer on this
committee, i believe she is from district 4, and we were talking about traffic lights and traffic calming. i, myself, have filled out forms and sent to the respective departments for traffic lights. one in particular is on san bruno and -- years ago i put in four applications. when the supervisor was here, she, herself, stated that people put in an application, and after that, nothing happens. so we had some deliberation and the transportation authority, the people that come here sometimes to give further
information said, okay, they are going to have a process. the woman who gave the presentation stated that the list was on page 23. i found on page 32. the package that we got. first and foremost, we have to streamline the way we present. and you have mentioned if you look at this list and you do represent your district as best you can, and we citizens appreciate that, we see practically nothing from district 9, as far as san bruno is concerned, which gives this city millions and millions in taxes. i am going to take this matter up directly with the director of
dpw. i will take the information to him that and provide information to mayor edwin lee that we have seven traffic lights within san bruno and sultan. as long as the government gives a dollar to the city, some things have to be done. if due diligence is met. now, one of things we have to keep in mind of the demographics. we have senior citizens, young children that need the based safety for their constituents. mr. chair, i ask you to look into this. thank you very much. commissioner avalos: thank you. next speaker. >> andy thornley, bicycle
coalition. we have lots of projects. at $105,000 is a great investment. on the marina bay trail, staff has made a great case for it. the enclosure lets you know how important this is for bike and pedestrian traffic. i was out there on saturday weeding and america's cup bike tour. we showed them how we wouldn't move all those bodies when the america's cup comes to town. it was crowded with humans, but not about cars. the parking that is part of the conversation here is not public parking. it is dedicated to slip tenants at the marina. ostensibly it is for their use only. if you talk to the neighbors, you will find that that parking is often abused by folks commuting in from outside of
town. the neighbors across the street would rather that parking was not such an attractor of trips. the public process we are talking about was a condition of the permanent than the bay conservation development committee put on the part project. the promise was by the end of 2012 a public process would be carried out to talk about what we do with that. [inaudible] doesn't seem like the highest and best use. we are willing to have a conversation with the community. i want to emphasize to this committee it is so important that somebody owns the community process. right now, i'm not sure which agency will carry out those conversations with the stakeholders. we need to nail that down and make sure we have it, and for that because by the end of the year, we need to go back to bcdc and say we talked to the neighbors, we are going to keep the parking, we are growing to do something with it. to not let us put from that
period it is important we do not get to the end of this year. it is also important and we try to carry out the conversation and come to a decision quickly because we have the opportunity spend this money once here that is really important. what to put this project out and do it right and to the extent that we are going to relocate the parking let's do that before we do the work that we are allocating this money to pay parking utilization from my observation is very low. this beautiful saturday maybe three cars there were using those 50 spaces. let's make sure somebody as the conversation and let's finish this wonderful project in time for the america's cup. thank you. commissioner avalos: thank you. next speaker. >> i would like to discuss an item for the broadway reconstruction project where you will be removing three trees and replacing them with 25 new trees.
i view this as an inconsistency in policy. at the same time, you are planting trees annualizing monday, on the other hand, you are relinquishing trees back to the property owners and san francisco. i think there needs to be a fiduciary duty in ethics to be diligent and responsible to consider all relevant information to be informed and understand the complete financial consequences of the policy proposals as they relate to the city's financial condition and to consider the bottom of the financial ice burke in relating to these trees because we cannot have everything we really need to make choices. there also should be a price analysis done on the $10,000 for one year of maintenance. even if you allocate 10 minutes per tree twice a month, 4 15 gallons of water for a year, the rate has to be well over $100.
i find the estimates of $10,000 for maintaining 25 trees in a two block area very expensive. this is not an unknown problem. i addressed this issue eight years ago at a citizens advisory committee meeting for the transportation authority. at that time -- i cannot recall if it was prop b or prop k funds being allocated for street trees. representative from public works basically said i do not want the money because i cannot maintain the trees. that was the position. was the attitude of everyone to take the money and plant the trees. so then we now have articles from 2008, urban forest as a potential branch out, and it discusses the fact of the plan the parma is expected to come up with a funding mechanism. 2009 article, understaffed
department struggles with tree upkeep. so my question is, why are we obligating these funds and not making certain decisions relative to the long-term care of these trees? if you cannot afford it, do not plant it. it is called the bottom of the iceberg. nobody wants to look beyond what the real issues are. $10,000 to plant trees is peanuts. but it is really the bottom of the iceberg that you are really in getting yourself to. so i request that you really take a good, ethical look at all the facts involved in this before you move forward and proceed fourth. commissioner avalos: thank you. >> as part of the annual call for projects for the prop k program, dpw is requesting
street tree maintenance funds. we will be digging deeper into this issue in coming back to the committee next month with more information. commissioner avalos: thank you. any other member of the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a representative from the mta here? i have had an experience recently. it was noted by andy that there was striping and pain and how he also sounds something about spending the money once. i was writing down alemany street where it had recently been strapped by the mta, by the paint shop. the lines on alemany street were crooked, very crooked. and they were appealing. yellow markers that were in crosswalks. white stripes for the bike lanes.
i call the director of the mta. he said those are temporary stripes. they are not permanent. i thought, if there are temporary, the reflect poorly on the mta that the strikes cannot be more stable to stay in the ground. they are action and not straight. they were egregiously crooked. i cannot imagine why we would actually strike twice the same place, why would we even consider doing a temporary paint on our main thoroughfares? do you happen to know what the procedure is for striping our intersections, is that a common way that we have to go over toys to do it? it seems extra costly to do it that way. >> i understand the concern. a lot of utilities and other city departments also work on our streets, so i would imagine this temporary tape, if it is
what it is, was done by somebody outside of our paint job. i can make sure that it is restored properly. commissioner avalos: it is alemany between silver and ocean avenue. i would even go further to check other parts of it. that was the part that i wrote recently. ok, colleagues, any other comments or questions? motion to approve? without objection. item 5. >> recommend support for the draft plan bay area transportation investment strategy. this is an action item. >> good morning, commissioners. this item begins on page 35 of your package. what i will be referring to is an enclosure that you have. probably the most dense power
plant project i have ever seen. they did a great job of taking a complex project and boiling it down to user friendly terms. transportation planners have done outstanding work on this. they have reached out to folks in the public, our deputy director for planning, and they have also reached out to other big cities like oakland and san jose, which is critical here those areas of shared urban core issues that are different from the rest of the bay area region. it has been great having that coalition. i will not go through all 31 slides. this is a shortened version to give you the highlights. first, the context. we are talking about plan bay area, and the long reach transportation plan for transportation. guides how the region will invest transportation money over the next 28 years.
the total amount available is $277 billion. these numbers are huge, so do not worry about it much. more important is the relative size of things. in the overall picture, local funding mix of more than half of all of the brt revenues. this is enormous. the federal share shrinks every year. all of the local funds are considered committed. there controlled by a voter mandate or by various ports. most of what i will talk about today has to do with the small piece of the rtp, the flexible funding. 67% of the overall funding is considered committed. the truly flexible money that the nutrition mtc just released on april 6 as this $56 billion which they are calling revenues available for trade-off. that is where all the excitement
comes from a at the regional level. page 12 in your enclosure. this is the $56 billion we are talking about. the only thing i will mention on this -- and please in directive there are questions. this includes several sources of new revenue. they do not currently exist. or the past, mtc has done an analysis and has shown between rtp cycles, often new revenue sources materialize. in this case they have assumed a new regional gas tax. anticipated $14 billion. and any bridge toll. what i can say in their favor is over the years new revenues have appeared between rtp cycles and they have taken the prudent step of assuming none of these new revenues will materialize in the next five years. the next five years is what i would call the real money for
projects. the new money is further up in the rtp setting up policies and the visions for the bay area. page 13 of your packet. with that $56 billion, mtc has come up with six strategies to explain their recommendations for using those funds. the first one is closing the greenhouse gas emissions gaps. one of the new aspects, the biggest, is sb375. as you know, it has certain greenhouse gas emissions goals. we still have a 6% gap. most of the reduction to date has been from the land use side. that said, mtc is recommending the two options for up to $700
million investment strategy and what they're calling climate policy initiative. that is focused on clean vehicles into the fleet. getting them smart driving. that means having your tires properly inflated, promoting car sharing and so forth. i will make a few comments, concerns that we are glad about as we go through them. one of our main concerns here is option 8. it features several ways to promote electric vehicles. by putting charging stations and a proposal for electrical hickel purchase incentives. we have equity concerns because those are high and vehicles. everyone benefits from clean air but only a certain element of the population can afford to buy those. option b, which is other policy options to achieve that lasted from of greenhouse gas emissions, has when mtc is
envisioning which would not be popular, which is reducing the speed limit on various speedway's to 55 miles per hour. these options are before the commission. commissioner avalos: do not tell sammy hagar. >> the second strategy known as fix at first, maintenance, there are recommending $24 billion of the $56 billion towards minutes. this is on the transit and local streets and roads side. this is comparable to the last rtp. overall, 80% of all those revenues is for maintaining our existing system. one thing i would know that is different we're supportive of, mtc has put $2 billion towards transit this time. ramallah to further push mtc to work with the transit operators and jurisdictions to identify new revenues for transit operations. that is over the --
jumping to slide 20 in your enclosure. commissioner avalos: that is across the region as well. >> on the mainland side, even though we are putting 80% of the plan in two minutes, their huge shortfalls on the transit side and local streets and roads side. this is sort of treading water. the third strategy you are familiar with, and the one bay area grant from work. this is one of the standout features of this rtp in terms of this being the first time mtc has linked transportation revenues to incentivize good land use. they are falling transportation towards para development areas to be transportation and development. the proposal has been out there for awhile. the most committed and recent changes a three-year funding cycle coming up. that has been moved to four
years. that gave mtc more money to address things like people wanting more money in the original safe routes to school program. it also deals with the concerned of product delivery around the region. with this four-year cycle, mtc is proposing a regional program is more likely to get the first two years of money because they can deliver faster. local projects get the second two years of funding. mtc has made it clear that if there are ready to go, -- we are ready to go, we can move ahead with the program. it woulthere is some ongoing discussions with zero back. there are places like contra costa and san mateo that are trying to water down the requirements percentage is going to be cleared areas. they are also concerned about the time from a local jurisdiction will have to comply with the requirements.
most of which does not apply to san francisco, because we already have them in place, i'm getting a complete street ordinance in place. i suspect mtc will give them more time, given that they do not have the technical staff. obag represents $14 billion over the 20 years. here is some of the new stuff and was in the paper. strategy is sending high performers. spoke previously about mtc having done a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the projects submitted for the rtp and came up with a high performing out liar. they wanted to find a way for locals to this crime them or to for discretionary money at the project. if you look on appendix 3, page 40 of your package, seven of the 12 habra former partners are samples for projects or regional projects of services coast ports. we are pleased to see that for
rtp purses as, we have directed original funds toward the better market street project, a trend effectiveness project, they have included our pricing program and so forth. 25. this overlaps a little bit. investment strategy for. this also included transit expansion new priorities for the region. on this line here, the regional transit's expansion plan had two prior is for federal and new starts. this is a big start of a big competitive transit expansion. these projects -- are far enough along mtc felt comfortable recommending additional funding for future new star preferred is and small start priorities. right now we have thus rapid
transit projects. these are the only two regional small start care is in the region. mtc assumes a conservative member, $2.5 billion for additional new and small start projects. page 27, we did very well. the two new priorities are in the second phase of bart to san jose and the transit from the center downtown extension. i will not say much about this. the deputy director with talk about in next agenda item. they also added another ac transit part of the project and another additional funding for van ness brt. in addition, $660 million reserve for other newer small start projects. we have asked that there be somewhere in writing a discussion at the mtc about the timing and process to decide which projects we will be able to compete here we have projects such as the geneva and geary brt that would compete
well for these funds. we want to make sure those funds go to top performer projects. the last one -- this is the big strategy. mtc has had in the early investment strategy for the high-speed rail corridor in the bay area. that includes two projects, both of which are prop k priorities, electrification including new rolling stock, and the advanced signal system which was previously known as the positive train control. last two strategies. strategy 5 is about making the existing system work better. the bigger thing here is that mtc has included -- commissioner kim: i can let you finish the presentation. it is about the electrification. i will wait until you're done.
>> two of the high performing projects and our potential project of the downtown area mtc has less include those in the region transportation plan. this does not mean that the pricing will move forward. the only means that it is in the rtp so we are not precluded from going forward if we choose to do so. in other thing which should be here but was not mentioned, mtc has done something that we are proud of. we have had a role in coming up with half a billion dollars in transit performance initiative programs. we are trying to seek clarification with mtc. right now, there has been a call for $30 million from the trend this inability project related to this, focusing on low-cost equipment projects like transit signal clarity on arterioles, which is great, but also want to see more sizable investments
like crossovers or grade separation that will improve the reliability of the existing system. we think this is cost-effective and an equity issue. these tend to be the transit areas in the urban core. the last initiative is the trend of performance initiative. we are thrilled that the 500 billion is included. our main comment in the memo was that we wish it were higher compared to the freeway performance initiative, which has $2.7 billion, but it is a great start. you can see a pie chart on 36. the overall message is the way that mtc is proposing to use the money is not different from the last rtp. most of it goes towards maintenance for the smaller projects. these next few months are the
key ones for the rich and transportation plan sustainable community strategy. i am sure commissioner avalos knows it is in april. the commission discussed last witness transportation investment strategy. expected to pick the alternative in may along with the obag framework. then that kicks up the process for the environmental review. eventually, april 2013 is when you accept adoption of the regional transportation plan. typically in the past you have not seen changes in the project list over the period. this rtp is different. it is possible that if there are more changes, my suspicion is it will be on the land use side. we have are happy to answer any questions. commissioner avalos: thank you. commissioner from commissioner kim. seeing none, public comment is closed. it is great to see the -- commissioner kim: it is great to
see the new starts. i have a question about the dpx. i wonder if you could clarify if there was shifting in terms of the commitments mtc has made for so what they're asking san francisco to make through the sales tax. i wonder if you knew anything about that. >> it is 26 in your packet. 27. that is where they show a funding strategy. one thing i did not clarify, commissioners -- this is extremely confusing for people. the regional transportation plan is only a plan about setting policies. it is not a programming document. very few exceptions. the most important aspect of the new starts recommendation is the downtown extension has been identified as one of two regional projects for funds. mtc has recommended it for $650
million in new start funds. we are hoping for a higher amount. when you can see in this table if you look on slide 27, because they have to work within the constraints of the rtp, the have dump the rest of the shortfall for the project into a potential sales tax authorization. that enables it to get to the rtp. the reality of the new starts process is a proud sponsor engages with the fda at the beginning and you go through a lot of troops. and they would ultimately determine what the new starke amount is. when i have seen in the past is once projects get into this with mtc support, typically these come back later with an updated amount. commissioner kim: i just had some concerns. i wanted to ensure that they are not asking for larger commitment than they did previously in terms of our sales tax revenue, although it is an important project. project. i am glad to see it on the list.