tv [untitled] May 3, 2011 3:30pm-4:00pm PDT
processing? that is another delay. groceries, handicapped people -- if you are nice, you get out of your cap and you help them in and out of your car. you have limited access to decide what if they are handicapped and in a wheelchair. my comments would be directed toward the parking permit. i got some parking permits the other day in the mail. somewhere down at the end, in big print, we have to move our cars. the residents of san francisco have to move their cars every 72 hours. are you going to really enforce that? seriously? you want to reduce pollution? we are talking about people in china that breathe our air. this is a small world. it is getting smaller every day.
people in new york have acid rain. we are going to contribute to pollution. we are not as bad as them. sonoma is a nice place to live. i think i might move there. but you have to move my car every three days -- are you kidding me? i can play that game. i can be you guys. i can work right around it. but i have to start my car up to do it. chairperson nolan: next speaker, please. david pillpell. >> good afternoon. nice to be back before the board. three comments on this. the ceqa determination is not included in your pockets. i was just provided a very small digital copy. that was not available for public review, except by appointment, before him. i think that is important to see. this in my opinion is a
different project than the approval of fees that was part of the budget. there are new fees included. it is a different scope of review. that item should have been before you, included in the packet, and available to the public. secondly, the analysis that justifies the cost recovery for those fees was also not before you. i think that is important for the public to be able to review that so as to understand the justification for those fees that are cost recovery. finally, on the last page, that refers to muni facilities for those fees the agency seeks to impose on its employees, which i think is unfair and inappropriate. it's still refers to geneva yard as geneva yard. i think that was just renamed in memory of cameron beach. at minimum, it would be appropriate to amend that section. it might further be a good idea
to modify the renaming so it is cameron beach geneva yard. i think that might make it more clear going forward. i would offer those three comments for your consideration. thank you very much. chairperson nolan: members, a motion? director heinicke: these will be pretty basic. first of all, to be clear, because we took it on to make sure that our friends in the building and trades community were notified -- this is not a fee schedule that has -- that had their interest piqued the last time there were before us, correct? we don't need to be concerned that we missed another a rich opportunity. i want to make that clear. this is not standard parking citations. this is a specific list of things. on more standard parking citations, you and i, and i
think all of us together, have moved to an indexed proposal going forward. aren't these specific penalties or citations also going to be subject to indexing going forward? just to clarify, the indexing proposal or indexing policy applies to the broad base of parking citations? no, it does not. >> thank you for the question. we have sort of two buckets of things we can charge the public for. one is indexed. the other is subject to the state vehicle code. the citation is limited to vehicle code language that applies to all state citations. those we do not index. director heinicke: so for example, for the rpp, we can
only do cost recovery. but the broader set of tickets -- an expired meter, that sort of thing -- that is subject to indexing. >> that is subject to the same vehicle code which provides the caps. we are not at the cap yet for some of the citations. we are at others. we could come back before you can recommend automatic indexing for those. but those are also subject to the cap. we can't go beyond the cap. director heinicke: what is the example of the broadest non-cap citation subject to indexing? >> anything to do with transit. the muni pop violation, for example, could be indexed. that is one of the recommendations that are in here. i misspoke. there are actually three new things that the m.t.a. board did
not consider during the budget deliberations. the first is to increase the pop violation on transit. it does not make sense to keep the violation a lower amount than the passes. it creates incentives to violate it. right now, the muni pass violation is at a lower amount than the muni pass. that was not noticed in the budget process. director heinicke: thank you for reminding me of all that. those penalties and fees, which are relatively small, that are not subject to state caps or regulations -- we will have a policy of indexing on that going forward. >> yes. director bridges: i want to be clear, going back to director heinike's question -- you bet did that with the public? >> this is the public hearing.
this was put in the paper and noticed that you had -- that if you have any issues you could come before the board today. that is the process we follow. if the public wanted to be here to speak against the three new fees, they could. i do not think we heard the back on those specific items. chairperson nolan: do we have a motion and a second? all in favor? all opposed? item 13. >> to document traffic on the project for the minna-natoma and silver terrace project. chairperson nolan: no public comment? all those in favor? all those opposed? thank you. >> item 14, regarding capital programs including the central subway. now members of the public are interested in addressing you. executive director ford: this is
a presentation related to our capital investment program. the board has shown some interest in our operating budget. we will bring to use some of these capital projects, because there are literally dozens of them. we have a quarterly meeting with the fta that lasts three or four hours. i will convince these presentations we do and bring them to you so you get updated in terms of our capital program. the people who will be presenting to you is our central subway project manager, followed by project manager for church and dubose. she will be followed by our project manager on islais creek. >> good afternoon, and directors. i am the central subway program
director. as mr. ford indicated, the major capital programs are presented to the federal transit administration region nine deputy administrator on a quarterly basis. the presentation i am about to deliver to you is an abbreviated version of last month's quarterly question patient -- presentation. central subway construction commenced in february 2010, which utility relocation for the station and portal area south of market. the first contract is nearing completion, with the removal of all utilities to accommodate the future station and portal structure. private utility tie-ins and cut overs are currently under way, with completion projected within three weeks. that is the first contract to be completed. our second relocation contract was awarded on generic 12 -- on
january 12 to accommodate for the future market street station. currently, southbound automotive transit on stockton street is limited to buses, taxis, and touring buses. the photographs on the left are the pedestrian walkway barriers on stockton street, designed in collaboration with the union square business improvement district that requires the safety separation between construction, vehicles, and pedestrians, while also providing access to adjacent stores. one of the unexpected surprises during construction is the merchants' positive reaction on how the shopping experience has been remote -- has been improved with the removal of automobile traffic in spite of the significant construction in the area. the photograph on the right is the demolition of a sub-sidewalk basement vacated for the future
contract. you may recall the difficulty we experienced in reclaiming sub- sub what basements in the public right of way. -- sub-sidewalk basements in the public right of way along stockton street. owners were asked to provide us with an abandon space, as indicated in the photograph. that vacated basement space will be converted into a public- private utility vault for the utilities. previously, utilities that existed under the pavement area will be relocated into that basement space. one of the added benefits for the city of san francisco is that the older 75-year-old utilities will be decommissioned and replaced with new, upgraded 100-year design life facilities. here are replaced sewer mains on geary boulevard.
this board approved the cooperative agreement on april 5 of this year. the agreement has now been signed by both parties and transmitted to the fta. this third-party agreement satisfies the full funding grant agreement for fta third-party requirements. as most of the central subway alignment exists in the public right of way, acquisition was limited to three underground easements to accommodate underground track alignment, and two properties necessary to construct stations. the chinatown station property terms and conditions have been approved of by the owner and the fta. purchase rectification is expected by the end of this month. the agency has also begun relocating existing residences and businesses from the existing building, located on the corner
of washington and stockton. three residences have been relocated. the fourth residence is expected to be relocated in mid-may. one business has identified a relocation site and is scheduled to move by the end of june. the moscone station property acquisitions have been unsuccessful. if negotiations do not improve, we will be forced to initiate court action to remain on the project schedule. the central subway financial plan before you is comprised of federal, state, and local funding sources. the program has been successful in working with mtc and the transportation authority to provide funding availability with project needs. this board approved the central subway budget and financial plan, completing another fta grant agreement requirement.
central subway has also successfully mobilized its design and construction and management professional services agreements with a full staff working out of the howard project office and the 651 brandon street offices. in addition, a consultant has been brought on board. at the end of january, hill management is staffed and in operation. the program is also looking at acquiring insurance services through an owner-controlled insurance program, and anticipates the procurement decision will be made upon receipt of the tunnel construction bid, scheduled for the end of this month. our largest contract, the tunnel contract, is currently out to bid. we have experienced significant interest in this contract from around the world and anticipate receiving competitive pricing at the end of this month. we will come to this body in
early july, requesting approval to award the contract. our three station design contracts are at the 70% completion level, with 100% completion at the end of this year. the moscone station design has received design approval and union station and chinatown designs will be presented to the commission on may 16. the central subway system design has advanced beyond 65% completion, and has been leading the effort in developing the safety certifiable checklist, working in collaboration with the safety and security department. all program staffing needs have been met and we satisfy the technical capacity and capability requirements of the fta.
this is a program drawdown graph that monitors contingency usage, shown here in purple, and minimum contingency requirements based upon the level of completion, shown in red. like the previous contingency graffph, this monitor is scheduled flow contingency usage, shown in black, and minimum contingency float requirements based upon the program's level of completion, shown in red. thank you. that concludes my presentation. chairperson nolan: very comprehensive. when questioned about the moscone site, you said you were having difficulty coming to an agreement with the owners of the property. >> yes. chairperson nolan: is it all on the price, or is there something else? >> it is essentially about price. we have submitted an appraisal
and a re-appraisal of the property. we are working with the city attorney's office. we have filed the necessary condemnation proceeding to advance it to this point. it is simply a matter of agreeing to the amount or value of the property. chairperson nolan: any sense of how long that would delay this part of this? >> the proceedings are currently on track. we have anticipated this difficulty of negotiation in our program schedule. we have ample time to acquire the property and essentially obtain a right of entry that will keep the program on schedule. i was just everything the body that the negotiations have not been as smooth as we would have liked. we may have to proceed down the legal path. chairperson nolan: thank you very much. executive director ford: let's move onto the next project, the
church and duboce project. >> my name is ying-ming gu. i am the project manager for church and duboce road station projects. i am here to give you an overview and update. the project limit includes developing the avenue between noe street and church street, and between duboce and market street, including the crossing on market street. as you know, this corridor is very busy. it is a major thoroughfare for j line, n line, and number 22, n line the in the busiest liner system. -- line in our system.
the collaborative effort has started in early 2008. representatives from the china could neighborhood association and upper market cbd and other advocates such as what some francisco and the bicycle coalition were invited to a monthly coordination meeting, working with the city planning division, the san francisco arts commission, sfpuc, mta, and other staff. this meeting is still ongoing. it will continue to the construction phase. the community outreach meeting is going to be held this coming thursday, some good tamayo, may 5. -- cinco de mayo.
the goal is to make sure the community vision plan better serves the needs of the bicycles and transit users, the city better street plan, and the transit first policy. i think we are doing a pretty good job. hopefully the neighbors and the communities are happy with the end result. i will show you some renderings being developed in cooperation with dpna. one of the consultants' work with us and provided -- worked with us and provided engineering service to provide the renderings. the top picture shows the existing condition of the noe street service station.
the bottom shows the renderings of what it is going to look like. right now, it can only fit a one-car train. we are going to put some planters and benches on the board and island to provide additional seating. that is one of their requests from the community, that there is a lack of seating at the boarding island. the will be trees to line up with the noe street trees. you can see a decorative guardrail is going to be placed there as well. this is the existing intersection at duboce, sanchez, and steiner. part of the goal is to calm the traffic at that intersection. this is the community. a reworked -- we worked on the intersection to calm the
traffic and provide additional areas for pedestrians to sit and walk, and shorten the crosswalk as well at that intersection. this is a very interesting picture that was taken yesterday at the intersection of church and duboce. you can see the street car is still an old streetcar, and there is still parking on the north side, between fillmore and church. this is the existing condition. you see the same wording island and more people waiting at the boarding island. this is going to be what it is going to look like. we widened the boarding island and installed the new muni shelters.
also, we closed the traffic lane on the north side of duboce between fillmore and church to make it a by-only line. it will be painted green. i think a lot of people were happy about it. we are trying to make it a transit hub to make it friendly to all the users at that intersection. i am going to give you a very brief overview of the funding plan. the majority of the work is funded by fta, 80%, with 20% of a proper -- prop k match and the prop k pedestrian program. we are glad that could pitch in some money to replace the existing overhead lighting with decorative lighting fixtures. also, by the way, dpw and puc
joined us as part of this contract to minimize interruption to the neighborhood. they have worked this contract into the scope. they are good to be replacing and improving the water system. the total budget of this whole program is about $32 million. the project schedule -- we are already out in construction. the notice to proceed with the contractor was issued last month. the first phase of the construction, which is utility works, will start in june of 2011, this year. the first track work on church street will begin in september of this year. it is probably going to take about 14 months to complete the whole construction phase. that concludes my presentation.
chairperson nolan: members of the board? director brinkman: think you for all of this. this is my neighborhood. i have been involved in this quite a bit. this neighborhood does have very involved neighborhood groups and merchant associations. i know they were thrilled with the feedback and participatory process the invasion. i hope it was as valuable on your end. >> it is very valuable. i would like to think the community members for being so supportive and being so patient with us, and working with us on solutions instead of just complaining. there were very good, very refreshing. they provided a great service to our design. director brinkman: it looks like it is going to be a great project. i do have a concern for other neighborhoods that do not have such involved community groups.
this neighborhood is amazing. four other neighborhoods that don't have this, i hope we can take this and it somehow use it to get other neighborhoods involved when we have large projects. so many things ended up coming out of this that we would not have come forward otherwise -- the sidewalks, the decorative railings. the ad so much to the project. it is going to change the neighborhood. really appreciate the work. >> thank you for your comments. director heinicke: this is more of an operations question and a capital question, but that is a transportation hub. you have 2 the wall major light rail lines, and also -- you have two major light rail lines. what is the impact going to be? is it going to be limited to weekend disruptions? how are we mitigating the operational impact of a long project at a major corner? >> we have actually worked
extensively with our operation folks to figure out the minimal impact to service. the majority of the work will be done on weekends. the only work we cannot really finish in one weekend is the intersection at church and duboce. that will take at least 10 straight days. i think rerouting the number 22 is a challenge. we are working on that. the n line, we are planning on buses for the entire line. director heinicke: and local service would be supplemented. but other than a 10-day disruption. there will be serviced on -- there will be service interruption on weekends? executive director ford: at the right time, we will come back to you with an operational muni service plan. director heinicke: you did a wonderful job with san francisco. i would urge you to follow that
model. i did wanted to make sure we were dealing with a limited interaction window. executive director ford: we are getting a lot of practice at this. the next presentation will be regarding islais creek motor coach facility. chairperson nolan: vice chair lee had some concerns. vice chairperson lee: there was initial presentation given when chairman beach was chairing that. there was talk about relocating kirkland, but there was never a formal analysis or plan, or the cost impact. looking at the packet again, i still don't see that being addressed. executive director ford: what we plan on bringing to the entire board is a strategic look at the entire mta as it relates to real
estate, property, and facilities, looking at our 20- year plan in terms of rider ship, fleet management, and so on. we are not actively discussing any sale or development of the kirkland property. as we know things now, what we clearly see in terms of limitation on storage or vehicles going into the future, which can ill afford to talk about any facility being let go at this. we wanted to bring a package discussion that not only included kirkland -- it is oversubscribed. it costs in terms of maintenance. it is the right thing to do.