tv Government Access Programming SFGTV January 12, 2018 10:00am-11:01am PST
>> all right, let's get started. ok. welcome to the meeting. this is a special meeting -- start over -- ok, this is a meeting of the budget and finance committee for thursday, january 11, 2018. yes. i am supervisor norman yee, vice chair of the committee and joined by supervisor katy tang. supervisor malia cohen is excused from today's meeting. can we have a motion? >> motion to excuse supervisor
cohen. >> supervisor yee: madam clerk, linda wong, and i would like to thank somebody, here. thank jesse larson and jim smith from the s.f.govtv for broadcasting this meeting. clerk will also provide your names. madam clerk, do you have announcements? >> clerk: silence all cell phones and electronic devices, and items submitted to the clerk. items acted on will be on the january 23rd unless otherwise stated. >> number one, resolution authorizing the resolution and second amendment to the ground lease mission bay affordable
housing with the refinancing and minor rehabilitation, king streets and rich sorro commons. >> good morning, chair yee and supervisor tang. so, item number one before you is a resolution that would authorize our department to amend the ground lease for rich sorro commons. this project is an existing affordable housing project, located in mission bay neighborhood. it is owned and managed by the mission housing development corporation and provides 100 units of housing for low income individuals and families at a maximum of 50% of area median income, ground for retail and a child care center managed by the mission neighborhood center. this project was previously funded with bonds from the former redevelopment agency. mission housing is seeking a new loan with freddie mac to pay off the remaining balance of the
original bonds and to get capital to rehab the community room. the new lender, freddie mac, requested the city revise the ground lease to include some protections in case there a default of the loan. specific changes to the leases are, in a document captured in the supporting file, supporting document in the file called the second amendment to the ground lease. and those changes are specifically additional language in sections 1-5, that provide reasonable commercially reasonable protections to the lender in case there is a default by the property owner, and also language added in section six that would bring the ground lease to the city's current legal requirements. since we introduced the resolution back in december, the lender has also requested some additional changes that our department has come to agreement with. these changes are in an updated
version of the second amendment that we are, that i have copies of currently and i can ask madam clerk to circulate to the committee members. so, specifically the updated second amendment version that you are looking at now has a couple of additional changes that we have agreed to with the lender. we have added a new section 2, number 2, outlines the lender's right to foreclosure and assign the ground lease, provided the transfer of the property would go to a non-profit organization. also revises section 5 to slightly modify the participation of the lender in condemnation proceedings related to the property and section 7 adds language to limit the liability to the lenders prior
to foreclosure and acquisition of the property. none of the changes that you are looking at now or the changes in the earlier version of the second amendment alter, would change the lease payments, the term of the lease or the levels of affordability for the project. so we ask to forward with positive recommendation and joined by my colleague, jackie zoe, the city attorney, and from mission housing, in case the members have any questions. thank you. >> supervisor yee: in regards to the amendments you are asking for, in terms of the language, is this pretty standard language? >> i'll ask maybe our jackie, jackie from our office to talk to the amendments and the ground lease. but we are not actually making any amendments to the resolution. the supporting files, the second amendment to the ground lease is
where we have made some changes based on the most recent negotiations with the lender. jackie, can i ask you to speak to the supervisor's question to the ground lease changes? >> good evening, so, the question is about the language in the ground lease amendments. so, the bulk of the changes which are now reflected in item number 8, those bring the ground lease up to the city's current ground lease standards. so, that is standard language. the amendments that amy spoke about, number 2-7, those are -- those are the lender-requested language that we have discussed and negotiated with them and have come to agreement. >> supervisor yee: thank you.
good. no other questions, any public comments on this item? seeing none, public comments now closed. could i have a motion? >> supervisor tang: motion to send forth item 1 to the board with positive recommendation. >> clerk: resolution fixing prevailing wage rates for various workers performing work under city contracts. >> supervisor yee: ok. patrick -- patrick mulligan, can you please come up and from the office of labor standards and enforcement to do a presentation on this item. >> thank you, supervisor yee and tang. annual adjustment for prevailing wage rates for work performed under city contracts and some cases for private work performed on city property. office of labor standards enforcement compiled this data.
mostly through the california department of industrial relations. that would include the 66 classifications that are identified in the submittal. within that, there are many s subclassifications, many, and ten classifications unique to the city and county of san francisco adopted by the board of supervisors, gathered data from the appropriate labor organizations, collective bargaining agreements and collected those for approval as the prevailing wage provisions for those classifications. >> supervisor yee: no questions, any public comments on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. a motion, please. >> supervisor tang: make motion to send to the full board for recommendation. >> clerk: i believe the budget
analyst has a report on this item. >> supervisor yee: you know, i was not trying to ignore you, but yes, go ahead. >> good morning, supervisor yee, supervisor tang, the impact of this on the city in terms of the prevailing wage rates would really depend on the negotiated amount in contracts going forward. we do point out that the administrative code requires the civil service commission to propose these wage rates to the board of supervisors, however, the board does have discretion in considering information beyond what the civil service commission provides, so we do consider this to be a policy matter. >> supervisor yee: no questions, motion on the floor, and no objection, motion passes. madam clerk. 3. >> clerk: authorizing the department of public health grant in 7.3 million from san
francisco general hospital foundation, zuckerberg patient care quality improvement fund, octobers 23, 2017, through june 30, 2020. >> dr. susan erlich. file 171163, zuckerberg patient care quality improvement fund, $7,000,34 $7,000,346 -- $7,300,000. to improve the quality of patient care we provide. three different categories of projects. the first category includes
continued optimization of building 25 for access, readiness and safety. the second visitor experience and the third category, projects that invest in the future by enabling our leaders to transform patient care. the full three-year project as i said is $7,346,000. the breakdown is approximately, as follows, in the first year is $4.8 million, the second year $2.5 million, and the last year is $100,000. i'm happy to answer n i questions about this project. >> supervisor yee: no questions. as always, a positive thing to use foundation money. >> yes, it is, thank you. >> supervisor yee: ok. are there any public comments on this item? seeing none, public comments now closed. >> supervisor tang: motion for
item 3 to send to the full board, positive recommendations. >> supervisor yee: motion passes. >> clerk: item number 4, authorizing to accept and ex pend grant for the san francisco park alliance, for the playground renovation initiative, let's play sf, for 15 million. >> supervisor yee: ok. i have linda branson. from rec and park department here to present on this item. >> good morning, supervisors. good morning supervisors yee and tang. linda branson, item 4, resolution requesting authorization for the parks department to accept and ex pend a grant for $15 million, for 13
playgrounds as part of the let's play sf initiative. i want to start with some bookkeeping, there was some confusion in the supporting documents regarding the date the department wants authority to receive the grant funds. so, revised documents with the correct dates will be provided for the file. and due to this change, i want to request the following two amendments to the resolution. page one, line three, strike out the word retroactive, and then page two line three, include the term dates of january 2018 through january 2026. ok. so then on to the program. so, just a little bit of background. this initiative is a partnership between the san francisco recreation and parks department and the parks alliance to renovate the city's worst playgrounds. these playgrounds serve 20,000
children and they contain unhealthy wood or low to moderate income neighborhoods dense with children. initiative has roots in the 2012 clean and safe neighborhood parks bond, contained $15.5 million pool of funding for what was then called failing playgrounds. after passage of the bond, the rec park commission appointed a task force that met for six months in 2014 and considered a number of different criteria for determining how to prioritize playgrounds for renovation. they settled on three primary criteria for priority. first, the wood not healthy long they remember for children and playgrounds in neighborhoods with low, median income and high youth density. this led to the priority of 13
playgrounds across the city. since 15.5 million was not enough to address all 13 playgrounds, the department and the parks alliance, which had cooperated on hosting the task force, agreed to continue to partner in order to raise private funds so that we could transform all the sites more quickly than would be possible with public funds alone. i want to add here we are grateful to the parks alliance for the partnership, we believe will help transform communities and lives for many san francisco residents. and just a quick note on why this is so important, playgrounds transform community, they, we know that outdoor play and play in general promotes creativity in children and of course getting outside to run around and play is the big promoter of youth wellness. so -- the details.
this is a map that shows the playgrounds, the task force prioritized for renovation. tier one by orange dot and tier two are marked by a yellow dot. and again, 15.5 million was about enough to renovate the tier one playgrounds, but the partners were committed to renovating all 13, and thus the partnership and the grant from the parks alliance. and this is the preliminary budget for the initiative. the expenses are the same in both columns. the only difference really is the size of the grant from the parks alliance. right now we are aiming towards 11 million, but we, depending on how costs come, the grant may be a little bigger because both parties are committed to getting all 13 playgrounds renovated.
in tier one, costs from 1.7 million to just over 3 million. we are aiming to provide somewhat similar playgrounds in every neighborhood and the biggest reason for the cost variation is really size and site conditions. is pathway work necessary, grading necessary, do we have to touch a bathroom and do a.d.a. so, that's where the budget comes from. we are doing cost estimating for tier two. we do expect that the end price for tier two will go up a little bit from what we originally thought but again, the partners are committed to raising the funds to do all of these playgrounds. and just to show, although we have been hard at work on this for, for two years now, we have
started in 2016, and we have all six tier one playgrounds are in design. we are expecting the first playground, expecting to break ground on the first playground, washington square in the next few months. the rec and park commission has approved concept plans for let's see, for four of the six tier one playgrounds and also west portal playground, a tier two, but has separate funding through a community opportunity fund project. and actually, also we'll begin design work on uri commons later this month. and i just wanted to end by saying one of the really nice elements of this partnership and this project is the enormous amount of community engagement we have had.
so, to date on the first seven playgrounds, 56 community meetings, focus groups and neighborhood meetings. there have been a total of more than 1,000 people at these meetings. we have done 11 public surveys, and more than, gotten more than 1200 responses to these surveys, so we are deeply engaged with all of these communities in providing playgrounds and listening to what they want and providing what makes sense for each neighborhood. and so with that, i wanted to thank you, and i hope you'll recommend authorizing the department to receive these funds. >> supervisor yee: i have to think about whether the city wants your funds or not. well, first of all, i would like to say thank you to the parks alliance for partnering with the city. >> actually, i, drew becker, the c.e.o. of the parks alliance is here. >> supervisor yee: i want to thank you for being a good
partner, a great partner with the city. so many of our parks are in need of fixing, and i see that three of the tier two are in the west side, and a lot of times the west side gets sort of ignored. and i want to say that i personally have been trying to get west portal playground renovated ever since i've been on the board of supervisors, and the fact that again i'll remind people when we did the 2012 bond kick-off, it was kicked off at west portal playground so i assumed it was part of the bond measure and lo and behold once i got on to the board of supervisors, it was not on there. so -- and thank goodness the community had probably the same thought in mind, that you know,
we need to mobilize and actually start the process before the parks alliance oreck and park started their process, so i've seen, and really encouraged by the activism around that, and people, they made their own designs, they had numbers of meetings that we, they have had fundraisers and so forth. so, i'm hoping that in the next three years before i leave office we'll get this done. >> that's fully our intention. >> supervisor yee: thank you very much. any public comments on this item? >> good morning, drew becker, c.e.o. of the san francisco
parks alliance. thank you for your kind words and we are happy to partner with rec and park. i really truly believe this program is really setting the bar high for future partnerships and what we can do for citywide initiatives and raising funds to invest in our public play infrastructure. the partnership has just been -- we go to funders or whoever, it's great to walk in and like playgrounds, we love playgrounds, we want to give you money. we wish that happened all the time, but it doesn't. it's been great and we are excited to invest in our neighborhoods. as lisa said, we have talked to and invested about 2,000 people throughout this, these community meetings, which has been really great. we have seven projects in construction and i think one of the big things we want to talk about is the ongoing friends groups that will be created around those playgrounds. with the 2,000 people we have engaged, we don't want to have
them go away after the project is complete. so, we are actually actively engaging them throughout the construction process to create friends groups, to have them program and care for these playgrounds and greater parks and obviously their neighborhoods. so, we are really excited to be a part of this program, excited that you are excited about this program, and off the record, the west side is the best side, so we are investing in that. thanks. >> supervisor yee: i think we agree here. thank you very much, and by the way, i just met with some parents about a playground, and they are interested in actually, it's a park, and it's a friends of the park, they might want to form something, friends of the playground piece. because i don't know, there's a lot of parents involved with the friends of golden gates heights park. ok, any other public comments,
seeing none. now closed. >> supervisor tang: motion to first adopt the amendments previously stated regarding page one line three, page two line three, and send forth as amended to the full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor yee: thank you. no objection, motion passes. >> clerk: item number five, ordinance appropriating 300,000, cigarette litter abatement fees, public works street cleaning program, 2017-18. >> good morning, supervisor yee, tang. we are before you with a $300,000 supplemental appropriation from cigarette abatement fee revenue, use the additional revenue for additional staff to provide enhanced manual cleaning throughout the city and additional steam cleaning resources through areas that need additional clean-up based
on our 311 data and our internal data that we have identified for areas that need additional cleaning. the cigarette abatement fee is determined by the controllers office, based on numbers that public works provide and the current year, we have received approximately $4.8 million, so this $300,000 is addition l an amount on top of that. and with that, i have tom smith, assistant superintendent for the bureau of street and environmental services. >> supervisor tang: we enjoyed working with public works and environment and surf rider foundation to pilot the cigarette butt ash can project over in districts 1 and 4, and so far i think at least what i heard, it's working pretty well and encouraging people to put their cigarette butts in the ash cans instead of on the ground. i do have a question, though, looking at the dollar amount here. we did on tuesday see that
supervisor kim had introduced a supplemental of $800,000 for clean-up of the streets, and wondering, given, it's no secret i don't like supplemental, is there any way to use some of this funding for some of the clean-up that i imagine she's probably trying to get at as well? >> supervisor tang, i don't know if i'm the best person to answer that question, having not seen her supplemental appropriation. i would assume there is some overlap between this and what she's proposed, but i have not seen it. not well positioned to speak. we can speak with her office and provide additional information later. >> supervisor tang: i think that would be great and if the mayor's office could look into that, i would prefer we don't have supplementals mid year, so great if we can figure out where there is overlap, whether the $800,000 amount could be reduced or what have you. so -- >> supervisor tang, my understanding is there will be
the comprehensive annual financial report will be coming forward this week and show some surplus funds, made available for the supplemental. i have not seen the supplemental either, but i do know that more information coming forward when that is introduced. >> i think regardless of whether there are supplemental funds, i mean -- additional funds available, i want to make sure that we are not duplicating what it is that people are asking for, right? so, it's all to clean our streets. so -- anyway, i'll follow up with staff afterwards. >> supervisor yee: the question i have in regards to the efforts. did you know how many pounds of cigarette butts you pick up? >> supervisor yee, a number that i don't readily have. i do know that is a number we track and can provide you after this meeting. it's our performance and sat
team tracks and maintains those numbers, so it's something we can provide. i don't have the number readily available. >> supervisor yee: that would be interesting. i assume that that's what you based your performance on. would you have answer to that? >> good morning, supervisor yee and tang. we do track it, i don't have it right now. we can get that for you. >> supervisor yee: additional 300,000, what are you hoping to accomplish? >> to help better the streets -- more tonnage and service requests in our department and it's skyrocketing, we just need these people to help maintain, keep the city clean. >> supervisor yee: i commend your efforts on this, and anything where we could keep these tobacco, or these cigarettes out of our ocean, better for the environment.
ok. >> ordinance appropriates $300,000 in cigarette litter abatement fees. appropriated 4.7 million in the current year, most to public works for street cleaning, some amount to treasury tax for administrative fees. our understanding that the $300,000 represents a surplus in fee revenues from 16-17 and 17-18. it would fund approximately 8900 hours in additional services and we recommend approval. >> supervisor tang: i just wanted to clarify, i just got confirmation that the supplemental was not formally introduced, just discussed during introduction and it was in the news, but anyway, i still would like for us to work together on figuring that piece out, if it is introduced formally. >> supervisor yee: ok. any public comments on this item?
seeing none, public comments closed. >> supervisor tang: motion to send item 5 to the full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor yee: motion passes. >> clerk: 6, resolution accepting the mental health services act assignment and assumption, related loan documents between the california housing finance agency and the department of public health, benefit of the willie b. kennedy senior housing development at 1239 turk street. >> supervisor yee: ok, i think we have -- ok. emile momo, from the department of public health to present. >> good morning, supervisor yee and supervisor tang, happy new year to you. here on behalf of the department of public health on the mental health services program, and requesting approval by the board of supervisors, assignment and assumption agreement from the
california housing and finance agency for the loan agreements for the willie b. kennedy apartments senior housing. the project was developed by the tenderloin neighborhood development corporation, and the rosa parks. eight units for low income seniors. this project was completed in 2016. the total cost for the development was $49 million. three units -- individuals experiencing serious mental illness, at risk of homelessness or recently homeless. other units made possible by an award by the california finance housing agency, and those, the dollar amounts construction for the three units. some pictures of some of the
units. so, this -- this assignment, this agreement, a natural for the program, we oversee close to 100 housing units for individuals who are seriously mentally ill. by accepting this agreement, no liability to the city. the city would have the lender's role, and all agreements will be nullified. the city would have everything including compliance, reporting to the state department of health care services. assignment and assumption of agreements agreed and approved by the united states housing and urban development, california housing agency and the san francisco city attorney. so, respectfully ask for your approval of the resolution. >> supervisor yee: seeing no questions, any public comment on this item? seeing none, now closed.
a motion, please. >> supervisor tang: motion to send item 6 to the full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor yee: passes, thank you very much. call 7, 8, 9, 10 together. >> yes, sale not to exceed 177 million aggregate principal amount of bonds, 8, appropriate yating 177 million transportation agency bond, transportation agencies, street and transit projects in 2017-2018. item 9, directing sales not to exceed 76.7 million city obligation bonds, clean and safe neighborhood park bonds, and item number 10, ordinance appropriating 76.7 million,
proceeds from the thirds issuance of the 2012 clean and safe neighborhood parks general obligation bonds, series 2018 to the recreation and park department foreign vagus, repair and construction of parks and open spaces. >> supervisor yee: here to present on 7 and 8, director at reskin, and later to present on 9 and 10, antonio guerra from rec and park. >> good morning, chair yee, and member of the committee. ed reskin, director of transportation to respectfully request your approval of all four items. i will be speaking for the first two. but as a member of the capital planning committee, fully support all four items the first two, the second issuance for the 2014 transportation and road
improvement general obligation bond. you'll recall that is a $500 million bond that was recommended by the transportation 2030 task force, it was approved with 72% of the vote by the voters in november of 2014. the first issuance was about 67 million, this authorization would be for up to another 177 million and you can see the proposed subsequent issuance schedules on the slide and the next two years. this just as a reminder was the overview of the recommendations from the transportation task force. the $500 million geo bond was the first of a number of local measures that recommended both that bond and a subsequent one in 2024, incorporated into the city's capital plan. a few other recommended revenue measures that are currently being rereviewed by the transportation 2045 task force, the report for which should be
out i believe this month. this is a picture by expenditure category of the overall bond as well as the, what was approved in the first issuance, after a supplemental appropriation you approved last year, and that you can see what is in the second issuance in terms of what we are proposing and what the balance would be. so the first issuance thanks in part to the supplemental that you approved is largely expended. i'll show you a chart later that shows where we are more specifically, but fully expended in early calendar 2019, but we have a number of projects that are ready and waiting for these funds that would come from the second issuance which is why we are bringing them before you now. just a little bit of a timeline in terms of the bond approval, you can see it took a little while before the first issuance came and some of the highlights
in terms of actual projects and expenditures from that first issuance, and here you can see as i said, we are already about 80% expended, and we'll be largely expended by the end of the year, by the first -- by about this time next year. so, in terms of the second issuance, the 177 that is before you, here are the categories at a high level later in the presentation, a specific list of projects. but one of the main areas of expenditure proposed in the bond was for the moving forward program and this issuance has essentially the expenditures, level of $50 million, and as you know, moving forward this is the capital part of muni ford, making capital improvements in the streets to reduce delays and increase liability of muni service, focussing on the rapid
corridors which are those corridors that serve the highest number of muni riders. this, the other element of the transit category is san francisco's remaining share of it's commitment approved by the board of supervisors, for cal train electrification, got the grant last year and issued notices to proceed for the two main contracts, the vehicles and the infrastructure. these funds go to the infrastructure and now that they are ramped up and spending money, they are eagerly awaiting our issuance of this next, next set of bond proceeds so that we can support their project. the next category in transit
regards muni facility. renovate a warehouse we have. upgrading the facility, burke street off of third in the bayview. modernizing, shrinking the footprint of what is used for warehouse and bringing in our overheadlines unit which is in an unreinforced masonry building, once we are out of, we'll be transferring to the general services agency, they will then be seismiccally retrofitting for the animal care and control. the other part of this is the expansion for our muni metro east, our newer of our two rail yards. put the first light rail in service last year, we should have 24 cars here by this summer, and in order to accommodate those cars, as well as the additional 44 that are
coming as part of a contract that you have approved, all of which would be here in the next few years, we need the physical space to fit them all so we can house and maintain them. other main areas of transit have to do with major corridors, better market street project, in you are fairly well familiar with. i think you've had recent briefings from transportation authority. significant part of funding for the project is coming from this bond, and as you know, we made some good progress on better market street, hoping to be done with preliminary design within the next year, and the ground in 2020, so the funds are necessary to advance the design to get towards that first phase construction. likewise, improvement project which i know supervisor tang is intimately familiar with
approved by the m.t.a. board of directors and will be getting ready to go out to bid this year. so, it's -- will soon be ready for the remaining design funds and then subsequently construction funds, partly paid for by the bond. i should mention, these bond dollars leverage lots of other funding sources, federal funds, both of these projects will have federal funds and other regional funds, so we are using these bond dollars to leverage other capital dollars at the regional state and federal level. finally, a small bit but important one, we have engaged with bart to participate in their, the canopy project. you may have seen these canopies, one currently constructed at stockton and market, i believe. and this is sent primarily escalated reliability measure to
keep the weather and other problematic things out of the escalators so they spend more time running and less on repair. the street side of the bond, transit and streets. on the street side to advance 0 efforts, a number of different categories of improvement, largely in pedestrian safety but other traffic signal improvements and complete street improvements to further implement our visions, 0 strategy, bike and pedestrian plans, and you put that all together, you can see because a lot of these projects are fairly ready to go, particularly those facility projects, it's a pretty, a pretty strong spending curve that will have about 90% of the funds from this issuance expended by the end of next year. i won't go through these, but for your benefit and that of the
public, these are the specific projects under those broad categories, i mentioned, you'll see the purpose or reddish color is construction, which means a lot of these are either in construction now or ready soon to go into construction which accounts for the rather quick pace of expenditure associated with them. so, these are the transit projects, and then these are the street projects, the street projects are, some of which are in, or going into construction. some of these are more in the planning and design phase, and that's why there's a relatively smaller amount of this issuance on the street project side. so that's what the 177 million for the second issuance is for, and i would be happy to answer any questions. >> supervisor tang: thank you for the presentation and i support many of these projects here that are in, as part of this issuance.
and certainly know the importance of a lot of these capital projects. one comment i'll make is projects such as the el taraval, waiting for m.t.a. to be ready for the track replacement so we could never repave the whole road. i know it's our practice to combine as many projects as possible, you get in once and redo everything, but also meant ever since another supervisor, i don't know if this will, i hope the schedule will continue on track, we haven't done anything to that stretch. so, i'm just wondering how it is in the future, i know a lot of public comment you have to take on some of these muni forward or rapid projects, but it really does cost delay and other critical things that need to happen, such as the track replacement or the street repaving that goes along with it. so, any thoughts as you are moving forward with other rail
lines and so forth? >> yeah, so, thank you for the question and through the chair. we are trying to make sure that we are coordinating all of these projects. and if i recall when i was at public works, they did not have the rail replacement money yet, that comes largely from federal formula funds that flow through the region, and at the time when we were ready to repave back in whenever that was, 2009 or so, the m.t.a. did not have the rail replacement funds ready. that was before the full muni forward project was even envisioned. so, sometimes we have the issues where we are trying to line up with funding sources from the different agencies between m.t.a., public works and p.u.c. primarily, and that can lead, in order to do the project right and do it once, that sometimes means some agencies are delaying their scopes. so that was one issue on
taraval, which is now behind us. in terms of then the muni forward process, we certainly have a lot of lessons learned as you can imagine again. i know you are very instrumental in el taraval. what we learned from that process came a lot from your direct involvement and your office's involvement and support and i think the main probably, the simplest lesson learned, more investment in time up front with the community and probably with a little bit less of a defined project to clearly define goals and problems to be solved and issues addressed, less advanced design at the front end of the process will make the process go smoother and the investment of time up front will save time down the road. with taraval, a fairly well defined scope based on the work under the transit effectiveness
project. and then we spent a lot of time negotiating elements of that scope rather than saying here are the issues we are seeing on taraval, not just transit reliability, but safety, and the infrastructure issues and working collectively to figure out what the right scope is to solve those. i think that latter would be a faster path. i will say with the work and planning and design and coordinating, we continue to have coordination challenges. right now there is -- we have identified a utility conflict between the underground water and sewer and some other existing private utilities. we will need to get those resolved and so we may look at ways to phase the project to minimize delays. but there's not a lot of real estate underground and a lot of the utilities are jammed close to each other. to coordinate the utilities, making sure we are only ripping up things once, sometimes that does contribute to delays.
but we have gotten i think a lot better in my ten plus years here now in terms of coordinating between all the different agencies, as well as the private utilities so that we can hopefully make these projects happen faster and not delay improvements that folks in this case for ten years have been seeking. >> thank you. >> supervisor yee: stick with the l line for a second here. my constituents are wondering what's going on with the 17th avenue stop, real specific, sorry. and how we can compromise something that would work for people going shopping at safeway. have we come up with any solution to that? besides just getting rid of the stop all together? >> so, we did a fair bit of evaluation, including monitoring usage, even talking to folks.
where we left it with the m.t.a. board and i think it was in december, when the board first approved it, they approved the overall project, based in part on your feedback and feedback from others held on the 17th avenue stop. upon our further review, and looking at the stop spacing between the closest stops at 15th and 19th, the actual kind of use patterns of the people, we did recommend the elimination of that stop based again in part by the letter that you sent to the board, as well as other public comment. m.t.a. board was not entirely comfortable with that. so, they -- while they did approve the removal, they tasked us with evaluating over the next six months or so a few different kind of how the removal would impact people and there are, a number of options that we have been exploring. we have not found a good one that might work should we want
to retain the stop. but we'll be reporting back to our board of directors this summer probably june timeline with a final recommendation and if there were to be a stop, where exactly it would be. there will be a fair bit of parking tradeoff if we are to retain the stop and so you know, with all these decisions, there is always tradeoffs that we are contemplating. that's where it stands at the moment. >> supervisor yee: i have a question in regards to the high corridor injury improvements for pedestrian safety. and is there any where in sight, i mean, there's one that supervisor tang and i share, which is 19th avenue. i didn't see it on here, and also district 7 beyond 19th avenue, we have had quite a few incidents on ocean avenue and that's not on there.
so, what's the thought behind that? >> yes, so, 19th avenue is, it's within the transit projects, and that's something we have been working with the p.u.c. and cal trans on for quite a while. that should be going into construction this, i believe some time this year. so, there is funding in here, in the second issuance, $3.9 million for 19th avenue, so we are just finalizing and getting our final approvals from caltrans, and i believe they will advertise as early as this spring. that will be in construction this year and will bring significant pedestrian safety improvements. in terms of ocean avenue, i know that we have some spot issues that we are aware of in our working on solutions for. i'm not sure offhand if it's in the high injury quarter, but the
overall bringing to the committee in the next few months will lay out essentially how we are going to, how we are planning through, particularly our five-year c.i.p., takes us to almost 2024, our vision 0 goal, we'll be able to show how that capital budget on the street side addresses the balance of high injury network which is still yet to be addressed. if ocean is on the network, i imagine there will be improvements that you will see in the upcoming five year, relative to ocean avenue. upgrades over the last 15, 20 years, but the extent there are remaining intersections or stretches of ocean that should be reflected in our five-year capital improvement program. >> supervisor yee: the intersections and also a few of the muni stops, where it seems
to need improvement almost immediately. >> right. i know the one at aptos is one we have discussed, may or may in the be a design issue, but on the radar to address now. probably not a large capital fund need we would necessarily need the bond for but something we can do with the engineering and field resources. >> supervisor yee: thank you. why don't we move to rec and park for now. and present. i believe -- miss campbell, you want all four of these. >> madam clerk.
160.5 million. in order to fund capital projects for the renewal and repair of our parks, recreation and open space assets. first two allocated $83.8 million and today what we are seeking approval of is additional 76.7 million. this program is split into three main categories. on the left of the slide you can see that there are 15 voter approved neighborhood parks projects, totaling $97 million. there is 40.2 million in programmatic funding, park, playground, forestry, trails, water improvements throughout the city, and $21 million dedicated to citywide park projects at golden gate park, lake, and john mclaren. overall, the 2012 geo bond,
$195 million. and it was split between ourselves at rec park and our friends at the port of san francisco. this is our third and final issuance. however, the port still has a subsequent sale of 3.1 million that will take place in the future. and this is our issuance summary, broken out by appropriated projects. proposing to allocate 35 million to complete the neighborhood parks projects in the third issuance, and remaining allocation, toward the citywide parks and programs. i believe the previous presentation mentioned leverage funding. we do the same thing with our bond program. we have been able to leverage at this date, $30.8 million. these revenue sources include development impact fee revenue, philanthropic gifts, state grants and other city funding
like the department capital baseline and other allocations. so, this is a status update of our neighborhood park program. we currently have six sites open to the public, two are in construction, and seven are in either planning or design. for citywide parks and programs, we currently have community outreach for projects in mclaren park and lake merced underway. we just went through the mclaren park visioning process, approved by the rec park commission in november of last year. and at golden gate park, the stanyan street entrance improvement project is now in planning. for let's play sf, we just had a presentation earlier in this meeting. 13 parks, concept design has been approved for five parks. two parks are in planning.
and this third issuance fund design for all tier one parks. trails program, last november, approved $2 million for trails in mclaren park. 1.9 million for golden gate park, woodland trails. improvement project, bid package is being finalizeed and advertised in early 2018. forestry program, rec park is working on a master plan with the planning department. water conservation, alamo is in construction, and others will be completed this fall. a chart of the neighborhood park spending, 90% expended of our neighborhood parks funds. so, i can tell you, we are very eager to receive the cash from this bond sale. overall throughout the entire bond program and the two
issuances, 78% of the funding we have spent. and in citywide parks and programs, we have spend 50%, a much smaller percentage. however, it's a much smaller portion of the first and second issuances, and we are focussing on that in the third issuance. this is a line graph of our spending over time projection. as you can see, once we have cash in hand, by the end of the summer, we are projecting a large increase in spending due to the construction of our final neighborhood parks projects. we plan to spend all bond funds by the end of 2020. say program schedule overview of the neighborhood parks program. the green bars on this schedule are when construction is going to commence. and we have quite a few projects ready to break ground this year, like rossi, garfield, george