PPC020508 RESOLUTION NO. 08-51archive.sfcta.org/sites/default/files/content/Executive/Meetings/board/2008/feb...PPC020508 RESOLUTION NO. 08-51 H:\Resolutions\2008RES\R08-51 Prop K

$Page 1: PPC020508 RESOLUTION NO. 08-51archive.sfcta.org/sites/default/files/content/Executive/Meetings/board/2008/feb...PPC020508 RESOLUTION NO. 08-51 H:\Resolutions\2008RES\R08-51 Prop K$
PPC020508 RESOLUTION NO. 08-51

H:\Resolutions\2008RES\R08-51 Prop K MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.doc Page 1 of 4

RESOLUTION ALLOCATING $150,000 IN PROP K FUNDS, WITH CONDITIONS, TO

THE MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY (MTA) FOR THE GENEVA TRANSIT

PREFERENTIAL STREET (TPS) STUDY, SUBJECT TO THE ATTACHED FISCAL YEAR

CASH FLOW DISTRIBUTION SCHEDULE

WHEREAS, The Prop K Bus Rapid Transit/Transit Preferential Streets (TPS)/Muni Metro

Network category provides funding for TPS improvements that are intended to improve the speed

and reliability of on-street transit service; and

WHEREAS, The 5-Year Prioritization Program (5YPP) for the Bus Rapid

Transit/TPS/MUNI Metro Network category includes a line item for the Municipal Transportation

Agency (MTA) to develop a TPS project on Geneva Avenue; and

WHEREAS, The Geneva Avenue corridor, in combination with the Ocean Avenue

corridor, serves as the primary east-west cross-town link on the southern end of San Francisco; and

WHEREAS, The MTA submitted a request for $150,000 in Prop K funds for the Geneva

TPS Study to assess the potential performance and service benefits associated with making near to

mid-term TPS improvements along Geneva Avenue between Ocean Avenue and Munich Street and

San Jose Avenue between Ocean Avenue and Mt. Vernon Avenue in a manner that addresses

neighborhood transportation-related concerns such as safety, parking, and access to transit; and

WHEREAS, There are sufficient funds in the Capital Expenditures line item of the

Authority’s approved Fiscal Year 2007/08 budget to cover the proposed action; and

WHEREAS, After reviewing the request, Authority staff recommended allocating $150,000

in Prop K funds, with conditions, to the MTA for the Geneva TPS Study as described in the

attached Allocation Request Form; and



WHEREAS, At its January 23, 2008 meeting, the Citizens Advisory Committee unanimously

supported the staff recommendation; and

WHEREAS, On February 5, 2008, the Plans and Programs Committee reviewed and

recommended approval of the staff recommendation; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the Authority hereby allocates $150,000 in Fiscal Year 2007/08 Prop K

funds to the MTA, with conditions, for the Geneva TPS Study; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the Authority finds the allocation of these funds to be in conformance

with the priorities, funding levels, and prioritization methodologies established in the Prop K

Expenditure Plan, the 2005 Prop K Strategic Plan, and relevant 5YPP; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the Authority hereby authorizes the actual expenditure (cash

reimbursement) of funds for these activities to take place subject to the Fiscal Year Cash Flow

Distribution Schedule detailed in the attached Allocation Request Form; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the Capital Expenditures line item for subsequent fiscal year annual

budgets shall reflect the maximum reimbursement schedule amounts adopted and the Authority

does not guarantee reimbursement levels higher than those adopted; and be it further

RESOLVED, That as a condition of this authorization for expenditure, the Executive

Director shall impose such terms and conditions as are necessary for the project sponsor to comply

with applicable law and adopted Authority policies and execute a Standard Grant Agreement to that

effect; and be it further

RESOLVED, That as a condition of this authorization for expenditure, the referenced

project sponsor shall provide the Authority with any other information it may request regarding the

use of the funds hereby authorized; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the Capital Improvement Program of the Congestion Management

Program, the 2005 Prop K Strategic Plan, and the relevant 5YPP will be amended as appropriate.



ATTACHMENTS:

1. Allocation Request Form 2. Prop K Capital Budget 3. Prop K Fiscal Year Cash Flow Distribution – Summary Table


San Francisco County Transportation AuthorityProposition K Sales Tax Program Allocation Request Form

FY of Allocation Action: 2007/08

Project Name:

Implementing Agency:

EXPENDITURE PLAN INFORMATION

Category:

Subcategory:

EP Project/Program:

EP Line Number (Primary): 1 Current Request:

Other EP Line Numbers:

Geneva Transit Preferential Street (TPS) Study

SCOPE

MTA - San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI)

A. Transit

i. Major Capital Projects (transit)

a.1 Bus Rapid Transit/MUNI Metro Network

$150,000

Please see attached MS Word file.

Gray cells will automatically be filled in.

Sufficient scope detail should be provided to allow Authority staff to evaluate the reasonablenes of the proposed budget and schedule. If there are prior allocations for the same project, provide an update on progress. Maps, drawings, etc. should be provided on Worksheet 7-Maps.or by inserting additional worksheets.

Project sponsors shall provide a brief explanation of how the project was priortized for funding, highlighting: 1) project benefits, 2) level of public input into the prioritization process, and 3) whether the project is included in any adopted plans, including Prop K 5-Year Prioritization Programs. Justify any inconsistencies with the adopted Prop K Strategic Plan or 5-Year Prioritization Program(s).

Indicate work to be performed by outside consultants or force account. Very long scopes may be typed into a separate Word file.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 1-Scope Form v. 01.2006 Page 1 of 11


FY 2007/08

Project Name:


ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE

Type : Completion Date

(mm/dd/yy)

Status:

Start Date End DateQuarter Fiscal Year Quarter Fiscal Year

4 2007/08 2 2009/10

N/A N/AN/A N/A

N/A N/A


SCHEDULE COORDINATION/NOTES


Environmental Studies (PA&ED)

PROJECT DELIVERY MILESTONES

Provide project delivery milestones for each sub-project included in the current request, if appropriate. Describe coordination with other project schedules or external deadlines (e.g., obligation deadlines) that impact the project schedule, if relevant.

Planning/Conceptual Engineering

Start Procurement (e.g. rolling stock)Project Completion (i.e., Open for Use)

Design Engineering (PS&E)R/W Activities/AcquisitionAdvertise ConstructionStart Construction (e.g., Award Contract)

Enter dates for ALL project phases, not just for the current request. Use July 1 as the start of the fiscal year. Use 1, 2, 3, 4 to denote quarters and XXXX/XX for the fiscal year (e.g. 2007/08). Additonal schedule detail may be provided in the text box below.

Anticipated 18 month project.

Phase I –Project Initiation Scope, Schedule, and Budget Refinement (Month 0.50) Project Management Plan (Month 0.50) Public Involvement Plan (Month 0.75 ) Project Website Development (Month 1.5) Identify Project Goals and Objectives (Month 2.5)

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 2-Schedule Form v. 01.2006 Page 2 of 11


Phase II - Feasibility Assesment and Alternatives Analysis Task 1. Public Participation Process 1.1 Public Work Sessions 3 meetings (Months 3, 5 and 12)1.2 Public Open Houses 2 meetings (Months 6 and 15)

Task 2. Existing Conditions Analysis 2.1 Vehicle, Pedestrian, Bicycle Traffic Data Collection (Month 3.0)2.2 Transit Data Collection (Month 3.5)2.3 Corridor Operations (traffic and transit) Analysis (Month 4.0)2.4 Baseline Traffic Conditions Report (Month 4.5)

Task 3. Opportunities and Constraints Report. 3.1 Existing Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Report (Month 5.5)3.2 Long Term Opportunities and Constraints Report (Month 11) Task 4. Analysis of Alternatives4.1 Key Environmental Factors (Month 6.0)4.2 Evaluation Criteria (Month 6.5)4.3 TPS Transit Control Technology Alternatives/Integration (Month 6.5)4.4 Identification of Alternatives (Month 7.5)4.5 Draft Alternatives Analysis Report (Month 10)4.6 Selection of Preferred Alternative (Month 10.5)4.7 Final Alternatives Analysis Report (Month 13)4.8 Environmental Summary (Month 14)4.9 Final Preferred Alternative Report (Month 14)

Phase III - Action Implementation Plan 5.1 Project Cost Estimates Phasing and Action Plan (Month 15)5.2 Draft Report of Study Findings (Month 16)5.3 Final Report of Study Findings (Month 18)

Authority Notes:See Authority Recommendation Section for deliverable requiring actual dates after project initiation.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 2-Schedule Form v. 01.2006 Page 3 of 11


FY 2007/08

Project Name:


COST SUMMARY BY PHASE - CURRENT REQUEST

Cost for Current Request/Phase

Yes/No Total CostYes

COST SUMMARY BY PHASE - ENTIRE PROJECT

Total Cost Source of Cost Estimate$150,000

$150,000 Expected Useful Life: 10 Years

Prop K - Current Request

$150,000$150,000

$150,000 $150,000

Design Engineering (PS&E)


ConstructionProcurement (e.g. rolling stock)


Operations


MTA Estimate based on prior work

Total:

Environmental Studies (PA&ED)Design Engineering (PS&E)R/W Activities/Acquisition


Operations

ConstructionProcurement (e.g. rolling stock)

Environmental Studies (PA&ED)

R/W Activities/Acquisition

Enter expected useful life of completed capital project (e.g., use audit number).

Allocations will generally be for one phase only. Multi-phase allocations will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

In the table below provide information for the CURRENT Prop K request only rather than the total project cost for all phases. For instance, if the request is for Phase 1 of a planning study, just show the total cost for Phase 1 and the amount of Prop K funds requested for Phase 1.

Show total cost for ALL project phases based on best available information.

Source of cost estimate is intended to help gauge the quality of the cost estimate, which should improve in reliablity the farther along a project is in its development.

Authority Note: Pending verification from MTA.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 3-Cost Form v. 01.2006 Page 4 of 11


MAJOR LINE ITEM BUDGET

PositionUnburdened Hourly Rate

Overhead Multiplier

Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Hours Total Cost

Planner IV (5290) $54.81 3.06 $167.72 110 $18,449Planner III (5289) $46.20 3.06 $141.37 238 $33,647Planner II (5288) $38.20 3.06 $116.89 256 $29,924Associate Engineer (5207) $50.93 3.06 $155.85 136 $21,195Assistant Engineer (5203) $43.78 3.06 $133.97 160 $21,435Total 900 $124,650

Contingency 20% 24,930$

$149,579.58 *

* Round up to $150,000Authority Notes:See special condition capping overhead multipliers on MTA labor.Pending clarification from MTA whether budget needs to be revised to allow for potential contracting with community-based organizations to assist with the public participation process.

1. Provide a major line item budget, with subtotals by phase. More detail is required the farther along the project is in the development phase. Planning studies should provide task-level budget information.2. Requests for project development should include preliminary estimates for later phases such as construction. 3. Support costs and contingencies should be called out in each phase, as appropriate. Provide both dollar amounts and % (e.g. % of construction) for support costs and contingencies.4. For work to be performed by agency staff rather than consultants, provide base rate, overhead multiplier, and fully burdened rates by position with FTE (full-time equivalent) ratio. A sample format is provided below.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 4-Major Line Item Budget Form v. 01.2006 Page 5 of 11


FY

Project Name:


FUNDING PLAN - FOR CURRENT PROP K REQUEST

Prop K Funds Requested:

5-Year Prioritization Program Amount: (enter if appropriate)

Strategic Plan Amount for Requested FY:

Programmed$150,000

$150,000

Prop K Match % - Current Request:Total from Cost worksheet


Prop K sales tax

Total: $150,000$0

$0$0

100.00%

$0$0

$150,000$0

$0

$0$0

Fund Source

$6,495,777


$150,000

Allocated TotalPlanned

$0 $0

$150,000

$150,000

2007/08

Enter the funding plan for the phase or phases for which Prop K funds are currently being requested. Totals should match those shown on the Cost worksheet.

If the amount requested is inconsistent (e.g., greather than) with the Strategic Plan amount and/or the 5-Year Prioritization Program (5YPP), provide a justification in the space below including a detailed explanation of which other project or projects will be deleted, deferred, etc. to accommodate the current request and maintain consistency with the 5YPP and/or Strategic Plan.

5-Year Prioritization Program amount is the amount programmed for this project in Fiscal Year 2007/08 in the TPS Corridor Projects sub-category. The Strategic Plan amount is the total programmed to the Bus Rapid Transit/MUNI Metro Network category in Fiscal Year 2007/08 ($4,750,000) plus unallocated prior year funds.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 5-Funding Form v. 01.2006 Page 6 of 11


Is Prop K providing local match funds for a state or federal grant? No

Required Local Match%

FUNDING PLAN - FOR ENTIRE PROJECT (ALL PHASES)

Programmed

$0

Prop K Match % - Entire Project:Total from Cost worksheet

FISCAL YEAR CASH FLOW DISTRIBUTION FOR CURRENT PROP K REQUEST

Prop K Funds Requested:

Sponsor Request - Proposed Prop K Cash Flow Distribution Schedule% Reimbursed

Annually

30%50%20%0%0%

FY 2007/08

Total:

FY 2008/09FY 2009/10

Total:

Fiscal Year

Prop K sales taxFund Source

Fund Source

$0

$0

$0$0

$0

$0

$105,000

$0

$150,000

Balance

$0$0

$0

Planned

$30,000$45,000

$0

$75,000

$

$0

$0.00

$0Total

$0

$0.00$0.00

Allocated

Cash Flow

Amount

#DIV/0!

$150,000

$0

$150,000

$0

$30,000

Entire the funding plan for all phases (environmental studies through construction) of the project. This section may be left blank if the current request covers all project phases. Totals should match those shown on the Cost worksheet.

Use the table below to enter the cash flow distribution schedule (e.g. the maximum Prop K funds that are guaranteed to be available annually for eligible reimbursements) that you would like for the current allocation request. If the schedule is more aggressive than the Strategic Plan and/or 5YPP, please explain in the text box below.

Authority Note: Funding plan to be determined for the preferred alternative(s) that will be identified through this study. See Authority Recommendation Section for required related deliverable.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 5-Funding Form v. 01.2006 Page 7 of 11


This section is to be completed by Authority Staff.

Last Updated: 01.16.07 Resolution. No. Res. Date:

Project Name:

Implementing Agency:Phase:

Prop K Recommended: Allocation

Total:

Cash Flow Distribution Schedule by Fiscal Year (for entire allocation/appropriation)EP

Line%

Reimbursable

1 30%1 50%1 20% 0%

0%100%

If adjusting from Strategic Plan assumptions, provide detail:

Cash Flow Distribution Schedule by Fiscal Year & Phase (for entire allocation/appropriation)EP

Line Fiscal YearMaximum

Reimbursement

1 FY 2007/08 $45,0001 FY 2008/09 $75,0001 FY 2009/10 $30,000

$150,000

Prop K Fund Expiration Date: Eligible expenses must be incurred prior to this date.

AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATION

Total:

Notes (e.g.,justificationl for multi-phase recommendations, notes for multi-EP line item or mult-sponsor recommendations):

$45,000

Amount$150,000

$75,000FY 2007/08


Planning/Conceptual EngineeringPlanning/Conceptual Engineering

Balance

$30,000

Total: $150,000

Phase


Fiscal Year Maximum Reimbursement

FY 2009/10

$150,000

6/30/2010

30%

Cumulative % Reimbursable

$0

$105,000Planning/Conceptual Engineering

Balance

$105,000$30,000

$0$0


80%

100%

100% $0$0$0

100%

$30,000

FY 2008/09

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 6-Authority Rec Form v. 01.2006 Page 8 of 11


This section is to be completed by Authority Staff.

Last Updated: 01.16.07 Resolution. No. Res. Date:

Project Name:


AUTHORITY RECOMMENDATION



Action Fiscal Year PhaseFuture Commitment to:

Trigger:

Deliverables:1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Special Conditions:1.

Notes:1.

2.

[No subj-project detail for this project.]

TA Project Reviewer: Project # from SGA:

Amount

Reminder: Project sponsors are required to submit proposed amendments to the Standard Grant Agreement (SGA)(e.g. revised scope, schedule, budget) prior to incurring expenses that are inconsistent with the existing SGA, in order to ensure eligiblity for reimbursement by Prop K.

Pending Authority approval of MTA's proposed new overhead multiplier rates, the Authority will only reimburse MTA overhead on labor at the approved rates of 2.22 for DPT and 2.92 for MUNI.

Upon completion of the project management plan (Phase 1 task, .5 months), provide the Authority with the refined scope, schedule and budget including actual schedule dates (e.g. March 2008). See Note 1.

Upon completion of the Illustrative Existing Conditions Analysis (Task 3, Month 5.5), provide the Authority with a copy of this deliverable in electronic format.Upon completion of the Illustrative Long-Term Opportunities and Constraints deliverable (Task 3, Month 14.0), provide the Authority with a copy of this deliverable in electronic format.

Upon completion of the draft Project Phasing and Action Plan (Task 5, ~Month 15), which shall include a funding plan for the preferred alternative, provide the Authority with a copy of this deliverable in electronic format with time to provide comments prior to finalization of the deliverable.

Upon completion of the study (Task 5, Month 18), provide the Authority with a copy of the Final Report of Study Findings in hard copy and electronic format.

Upon completion of the draft Report of Study Findings (Task 5, Month 16), provide the Authority with a copy of this deliverable in electronic format with time to provide comments prior to completion of the deliverable.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 6-Authority Rec Form v. 01.2006 Page 9 of 11


MAPS AND DRAWINGS

TUN

NEL ESTA

BEATTY

GREENVIEW

HIL

L

LOS BANOSTREE VIEW

MIDWAY

OAK

CLU

B V

IEW

SAN LUIS

SAN GABRIEL

LUPI

NE

MAR

Y

SAD

DLE

BAC

K

MISSION ST

BRAZIL AVE

SAN BR

UNO

AVE

ALEM

ANY

BLVD

GENEVA AVE

SAN

JOSE

AVE

OCEAN AVE

03RD

STMANSELL ST

03R

D ST

VISITACION AVEGENEVA AVE

SAN

TOS

ST

ARLETA AVE

RU

TLA

ND

ST

HAH

N S

T

0 0.5 10.25Miles

I Geneva Corridor Transit Preferential Street

S A N F R A N C I S C O

S A N M A T E O C O U N T Y

Ocean Avenue City College of San Francisco

Balboa Park BARTNeighborhood

Master Plan

Mission StreetMajor Transfer Pt.

Visitacion ValleyThird St. LRT

Major Transfer Pt.

Phelan Loop49 & 9X Terminal;Balboa ParkNeighborhood MasterPlan

BayshoreCaltrain Station

Southern Terminal(Preliminary Terminal

trackage "hook"to Caltrain shown)

1.7 MilesGeneva Avenue

Ocean Avenue toSantos Street

1.2 MilesSantos to Bayshorevis Visitacion Valley

Santos andSunnydale

0.8 MilesSantos St. toBayshore viaGeneva Ave.

(9 AX BX ExpressBuses)

Brisbane BaylandsRe-Development

Balboa ParkBART Transfer Pt.

Livestock ExpositionCow Palace

Heavy Traffic Congestion atI-280 RampsOcean Avenue

Trackwork and Streetscape

Improvements

Third StreetCaltrain

Major Transfer Pt.

SFCTA Mission Geneva Transportation Study

SFMTA Excelsior Neighborhood Traffic Calming Project

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 7-Maps.etc Form v. 01.2006 Page 10 of 11


FY of Allocation Action: 2007/08 Current Request:

Project Name:


Signatures

Project Manager Grants Section Contact

Name (typed):

Title:

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

Address:

Signature:

Date:


$150,000

1 South Van Ness Ave, 7th FL, S.F, CA 94103

Joel Goldberg

Grants Procurement Manager

(415) 701-4499

(415) 701-4734

[email protected]

1 South Van Ness Ave, 7th FL, S.F, CA 94103

Project Manager

(415) 701-4463

[email protected]


Kevin Keck

By signing below, we the undersigned verify that: 1) sales tax revenues shall be used to supplement and under no circumstance replace existing local revenues used for transportation purposes and 2) the requested sales tax funds will not be used to cover expenses incurred prior to Authority Board approval of the allocation.

(415) 701-4343

Please sign in blue ink.

P:\Prop K\FY0708\ARF Final\MTA MUNI Geneva TPS Study.xls, 8-Signatures Form v. 01.2006 Page 11 of 11

Muni Service Planning San Francisco Municipal Railway | Department of Parking & Traffic One South Van Ness Avenue, Seventh Fl. San Francisco, CA 94103 | Tel: 415.701.4720 | Fax: 415.701.4502 | www.sfmta.com

Geneva Avenue Transit Preferential Street (TPS) Project Workscope

SFMTA requests $150,000 to fund the Geneva Transit Preferential Street study. The Geneva Corridor is one of 12 emerging transit corridors identified by Muni in its 2000 “A Vision for Rapid Transit in San Francisco”. This Plan envisions an enhanced and expanded transit system where transit vehicles would be largely separated from general traffic, and trips would be made quickly through the corridor. The Geneva Corridor (in combination with the recently upgraded Ocean Avenue Corridor) serves as the primary east-west cross-town link on the southern end of San Francisco. Geneva Avenue links the Southeast corner of the City with the BART and Mission Street Corridors and the Muni Metro K, L and M Lines at West Portal.

Geneva Avenue passes through relatively low density residential neighborhoods and a number of small commercial districts, but this corridor is anticipated to see some changes, especially at the eastern and western ends. The Baylands in Brisbane will be developed; Visitation Valley residents have initiated a planning process to address future development at Candlestick Point and Executive Park, and the City Planning Department’s Better Neighborhoods Plan has been examining new residential development in the vicinity of the Balboa Park BART Station and the Phelan Loop.

The following is a brief summary of the key elements that relate to the proposed study.

A. Project Overview:

1. The Geneva Transit Preferential Street (TPS) project is led by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA). This TPS project is being undertaken to study the potential performance and service benefits associated with making near to mid-term TPS improvements along the Geneva Avenue Corridor.

2. The project will focus on developing a set of “near – to mid-term term” TPS implementation measures that will improve transit performance and MUNI service along the study corridor in a manner that addresses neighborhood transportation related concerns like safety, parking and access to transit. This study will seek to

Geneva Transit Preferential Street (TPS) Project Workscope

December 3, 2007 SFMTA Page 2 of 16

identify measures designed to improve Muni transit operations and performance on Geneva Avenue between Mission Street and San Jose Avenue.

3. MTA anticipates that these improvements will complement the planned future transit improvements on Geneva Avenue between the Balboa Park BART/MUNI stations and the Caltrain/MUNI Third Street Corridors. The initial TPS improvements include (but are not limited to) an incrementally upgradeable combination of new and upgraded signals, transit priority signal systems, revisions to the number and spacing of transit stops, lane geometry modifications, and peak hour turn restrictions and/or prohibitions.

B. Project Management The project will be managed by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA). Kevin Keck, of MUNI Service Planning will be the Project Manager.

C. Project Schedule The project is expected to take 18 months to complete.

D. Project Location 1) Geneva Avenue between Ocean Avenue and Munich Street

2) San Jose Avenue between Ocean Avenue and Mt. Vernon Avenue

E. Public Participation – This project includes public outreach, participation and consensus development. Additional types of public notice/communication will include a project web site (SFMTA hosted) and a project mailing list including:

- community councils - neighborhood groups - business owners and groups - property owners and occupants in the vicinity - other interested parties

F. Land Use and Circulation – This project will identify how the existing land uses and transit stop locations affect circulation patterns in the vicinity of the Balboa Park BART/MUNI Station on Geneva Avenue and other surface transit stops. SFMTA will examine 1) how the proposed land use changes in the Balboa Park Station Area could impact transit service demands and circulation patterns in the study area and 2) identify how future development plans along the Geneva Avenue corridor may generate additional longer-term capacity needs that may spur additional transit improvements beyond the medium-term horizon of this TPS effort.

G. Alternatives Analysis – SFMTA propose, analyze, and evaluate three TPS alternatives. The three alternatives will be tiered to permit an evaluation of a logical progression of alternatives with incremental degrees of TPS related improvements.



Figure 1: A 43 Masonic on Geneva Avenue approaches San Jose Avenue

GENEVA AVENUE TPS CORRIDOR STUDY WORK SCOPE

The following work plan and schedule outlines the approach and deliverables for the Geneva Avenue TPS Corridor Study (study). The study consists of three project phases and five work tasks. The consolidated schedule is presented in the schedule section of the Prop K ARF. Each task description includes the deliverables and the approximate due date relative to the allocation of Prop K funds (NTP).

Phase I - Project Initiation • Refine Scope, Schedule, and Budget (Month 0.5)

• Project Management Plan (Month 0.5)

• Public Involvement Plan (Month 0.75)

• Project Website and Newsletter Development (Month 1.5)

• Identify Project Goals and Objectives (Month 2.5)

Project Management Plan - SFMTA will streamline the project schedule, staffing commitments, and budget in the first project month. SFMTA will begin summarizing relevant existing corridor transportation data available from existing reports and studies.

Public Involvement Plan – SFMTA will finalize a Public Involvement Plan to define how approved public information and outreach activities will be implemented. The Public Involvement Plan will be documented in Month 1 and distributed to SFCTA staff and other



City Agencies for comment. The Plan will: 1) educate stakeholders and the community about the study, 2) solicit input about how MUNI transit service in the study area could be improved, and 3) what impacts might be associated with the proposed improvements.

The principal public involvement strategies are the following:

1) Identify and contact a list of stakeholders to help notify the community about the project and the project’s two open houses. SFMTA will create a representative “workgroup” of stakeholders to help SFMTA staff effectively prepare for the open houses during two work sessions.

2) Organize and facilitate a series of two work sessions with stakeholder workgroup members. These work sessions would be held a month prior to each open house.

3) Go door-to-door along the corridor to meet with merchants and community members likely to be impacted by the TPS related changes.

4) Gather public input at these work sessions and open house public forums.

5) Present key findings from the outreach and technical processes to the public at two open houses.

SFMTA will work closely with other local agencies, City Supervisors, transportation-related advocacy groups and Community Based Organizations (CBOs), and the San Francisco County Transportation Authority to develop a comprehensive contact list. SFMTA will utilize our agency’s public involvement databases and reach out to formal/informal business and civic groups in the study vicinity. SFMTA will collaborate with the City Planning Department to notify local property owners and residents about the project and encourage their participation and feedback. To communicate with these groups, SFMTA will utilize the comprehensive contact list, visually interesting and informative web pages, and printed materials. SFMTA will also collaborate with the local and community based news media to publicize the process.

Project Website and Newsletter Development – SFMTA staff will develop a range of visual materials to convey project issues and concepts. These materials will be designed to be incorporated into a variety of uses including:

• A dedicated website where additional information about the program and meetings can be obtained.

• Newsletters and postcards to notify local residents and interested parties about upcoming open houses,

• And surveys by which community members and transit riders could provide feedback and suggestions to staff.



Identify Project’s Goals and Objectives - SFMTA will start the process to the identify goals and objectives for the project to improve transit performance and service reliability. The development and refinement of the project’s goals and objectives will be reviewed and discussed during the initial public work session.

PHASE II - FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

Task 1 - Public Participation Process • Three Public Work Sessions (Months 3, 5 & 12)

• Two Open Houses (Months 6 & 14)

The public involvement process will identify stakeholders. Shortly after kickoff, an initial work session with San Francisco County Transportation Authority and City staff will streamline the project scope and determine the degree of public involvement appropriate to the approved scope. Because of the multiple planning efforts occurring on Geneva Avenue in the vicinity of the Balboa Park BART/MUNI Station, a consensus as to streamlined scope is imperative so that project study areas are defined and the expected range and magnitude of outcomes are understood.

SFMTA will collaborate or contract with local community based organizations (CBOs) to conduct three planning work sessions. The work sessions would be conducted in an informal roundtable format with short presentations by SFMTA staff to initiate the discussion. Ideally, the workgroup will include a group of approximately twenty stakeholders, representing merchants, government agencies, advocacy groups and others. While each of the three work sessions will have a different agenda that focuses on unique study elements, any member of the public would be welcome to attend each session.

Work Sessions

1. The initial work session (Month 3) would cover the following four items:

a. Introduce the purpose of the study

b. Present preliminary existing data about the operations of the corridor

c. Engage stakeholders and members of the community about the scope of the study plan. Seek assistance from the stakeholders to engage their constituents in the process and to share their opinions and concerns about the project at the two open houses.



d. Refine the project’s goals and objectives by balancing the SFMTA’s mission to improve transit service in the corridor with input from the community.

2. The second work session (Month 6) will precede the initial public open house. This meeting would cover the following four items:

a. Introduce the Geneva Corridor Project with respect to the City’s larger TPS Plan

b. Present the findings of the baseline transit and traffic corridor analysis

c. Solicit stakeholder input to develop the three TPS alternatives to be analyzed

d. Refine the criteria used to evaluate the alternatives

e. Review presentation materials for the initial project open house scheduled to occur four weeks later.

3. The third work session (Month 12) is designed to present the initial findings of the analysis and the preferred alternative. This work session will also help SFMTA prepare for the final open house. This meeting is intended to accomplish the following goals:

a. Present the draft final analysis.

b. Identify the preferred alternative.

c. Prepare for the final project open house scheduled to occur six weeks later.

Open Houses SFMTA staff will collaborate with CBOs to conduct two open houses for the general public. These two events will include brief presentations by SFMTA staff and will provide a forum for members of the community to provide 1) input to SFMTA staff on the goals and objectives of the study, 2) the methodology and criteria used to evaluate the alternatives, 3) the alternatives selected for evaluation, and 4) the ultimate findings and recommendations of the project. Each of the two open house meetings would be preceded by a work session. These work sessions would help SFMTA refine its presentations and to flag key issues prior to the open house.

The initial open house (Month 6) would:

a. Introduce and explain the purpose of the Geneva TPS corridor study.



b. Present the baseline analysis to the public.

c. Solicit public input about the three TPS alternatives to be analyzed.

d. Refine the criteria used to evaluate the alternatives.

2. The final open house (month 14) would cover the following four items:

a. Present the draft final analysis, the methodology, and criteria used to evaluate the alternatives.

b. Identify the preferred alternative, and plan’s recommendations.

c. Seek community endorsement for the preferred Geneva TPS Plan.

Task 2 – Baseline Analysis and Development of Alternatives

Task 2 provides for the collection and analysis of the existing “baseline” circulation conditions in the Study Area.

• Vehicle, Pedestrian, Bicycle Traffic Data Collection (Month 3.0) • Transit Data Collection (Month 3.5) • Corridor Operations (traffic and transit) Analysis (Month 4.0) • Baseline Traffic Conditions Report (Month 4.5)

Obtain Peak Hour Intersection Volumes – SFMTA staff will obtain existing PM peak hour intersection turning count data from recent traffic reports and DPT turning count records. In some instances, SFMTA staff may need to collect additional intersection turning count data. Staff will also review existing (and commission additional counts if necessary) multi-day twenty-four hour hose counts. The analysis will discuss how localized school related traffic patterns compare to the peak PM traffic volumes.

Transit Data Collection– SFMTA staff will review existing MUNI data from routes serving the study area and where necessary conduct travel time studies to better understand the specific local factors that affect existing MUNI performance and service.

• Transit loading by stop and time of day will be reviewed. • SFCTA on-board survey will be reviewed to identify how the Geneva Corridor accommodates

regional transit trip patterns. Muni’s Automatic Passenger Counter (APC) data will be examined to identify the study area’s transit performance trends by direction and route. Staff will use this data to investigate the seasonality and variability of MUNI service and ridership over the course of a year and over the course of a day.



Corridor Operations (Traffic and Transit) Analysis – SFMTA will compile MUNI data performance data and traffic volume data to establish the relationship between roadway congestion and transit performance. The compiled transit data will be used to modify the saturation flow assumptions to better identify how buses operating in mixed flow traffic lanes could adversely contribute to approach delays and degrade the intersection levels of service. In addition to their primary role as a ridership data collection tool, the APC data logs on MUNI buses can (when the amount of passenger related dwell time is excluded) provide additional information about how roadway congestion and travel speeds vary by time of day and season. It is anticipated that the findings from this operations analysis will be used to identify the appropriate mix of TPS measures to be considered for each individual signalized intersection and roadway section.

• The corridor operations analysis will investigate how situational peak hour traffic congestion and traffic signal coordination (or lack of coordination) impacts transit performance.

• Transit operations will be reviewed to determine how factors such as dwell time and headway adherence relate to performance.

Total Daily NB and SB Muni Bus Ridership Ridership On Geneva AvenueSource: Muni APC Data Fall of 2006, pre T- Third Street Start-up

- 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000

Ocean

Howth

Balboa Park

Delano

Cayuga

Mission

Paris

Madrid

Naples

Moscow

Munich

Carter

Santos

Baseline Traffic Analysis - Using existing PM traffic volumes, SFMTA staff will evaluate the peak hour traffic operations at existing (and proposed) traffic signals in the Geneva corridor. Synchro software will be used to identify existing intersection levels of service (LOS), and calculate average vehicular signal delay. Anticipated queuing

Preliminary Geneva Avenue corridor proposed for traffic analysis Note: Illustrated network shown has been constructed to facilitates theinclusion of Geneva Avenue intersections in San Mateo County and includes Mission Street north of Geneva



impacts will be analyzed, and the potential for vehicular diversions onto residential streets will be discussed.

Traffic Operations Analysis – At a minimum, the LOS traffic analysis for this TPS project will include a portion of Geneva Avenue (between Ocean Avenue and Mission Street) and San Jose Avenue (between Ocean and Geneva Avenues). The analysis will be set up in a manner that will allow inclusion of data from a portion of Geneva Avenue located in San Mateo County. The analysis of existing conditions will include an inventory of the following items:

Roadway Widths Number of Lanes Sidewalk Widths Roadway Grades Traffic Control Devices Freeway On and Off Ramps Signal Timing Bicycle Volumes Parking Turnover On-street Parking Regulations

Street Trees and Streetscape Intersection Levels of Service Vehicle Speed and Delay Collision Hot Spots Bus Stop Locations Bus Stop Shelter Locations Transit Transfer Points US Census Journey-to-Work data US Census Vehicle Availability data SFCTA CMA arterial operations data

The traffic analysis will be used to determine how well the current lane configuration and signal system handles traffic, and how proposed TPS related geometric or signal changes could impact traffic operations. The operational impacts of the TPS alternatives including lane changes (i.e., restricted transit lanes, dedicated turn lanes, turn restrictions) will be evaluated on the roadways’ general mixed traffic flows. As part of the analysis, available right-of-way and the associated opportunities and constraints for traffic flow improvements will be considered. For the traffic analysis, impacts will be discussed in terms of intersection level of service, vehicle delays, and volume over capacity (v/c) ratios. This analysis will also review the impacts that the existing un-signalized four-way stop controlled intersection at Cayuga Avenue has on the corridor’s operations.

SFMTA will also review the DPT Traffic Engineering files for Geneva Avenue. These files include various letters that the City has received from the public about existing conditions and traffic operations on Geneva Avenue. Muni staff will work closely with Traffic Engineering staff to compile the existing problems and identify remedies where possible.

The evaluation of the existing operations on Geneva Avenue will be an important consideration for the SFMTA’s longer term vision for transit improvements along the Geneva Avenue corridor. The traffic operations study will review the needs of all users on this corridor including pedestrians and bicycles. This analysis will address how the existing operations of this corridor reinforce or conflict with Geneva Avenue’s designation as a bike route in the City’s General Plan.



Task 3 –Geneva Transit Corridor Opportunities and Constraints

The foundation of this task will be the creation of a qualitative opportunity and constraint report. This report will accomplish the following:

1. Identify the existing and proposed mid-term land use changes and transit facilities in the Geneva Corridor study area.

2. Depict the anticipated long-term land use and transit improvement changes along the greater Geneva corridor and how these changes could relate to the transit service provided in corridor.

This report will frame the existing and possible future land-use ‘character” of the Geneva Avenue corridor. A major component of this report will be the creation of illustrative base maps that will accommodate detailed transportation related maps and figures. These illustrations will help present a unified vision for the near to mid-term TPS measures considered by this plan and the subsequent long-term transit improvements along the greater Geneva Corridor identified in the Muni Short Range Transit Plan.

Illustrative Existing Conditions Analysis (Month 5.5)

For this task SFMTA staff will compile a map based list of the various existing land uses and circulation patterns along Geneva Avenue. Using the results of the existing conditions analysis performed in Task 2, this task will identify the regional roadway facilities and local “special generators” that currently affect internal transit patterns within the corridor and how these same land uses may impact external patterns to and from the corridor. This illustrative analysis will also document the existing local land uses and their unique seasonal and temporal traffic patterns. This analysis will also identify specific near-term and long- term opportunities and constraints regarding transit and circulation along the corridor.

Illustrative Long-Term Opportunities and Constraints (Month 14.0)

While Task 2 focuses on the existing land use related circulation and transit access patterns in the immediate vicinity of the Balboa Park BART/Muni Stations, this study task will also discuss how the anticipated future major land use changes at the eastern end of the corridor could impact transit operations and needs at the western end of the corridor. This task will identify how projects and plans like the Visitacion Valley Strategic Concept Plan (Schlage Site), the Universal Paragon Baylands parcel in Brisbane, and Candlestick Point and Hunters Point Shipyard may impact Geneva Avenue.

These developments are expected to place additional vehicular traffic and transit demands on the Geneva Corridor. Pending on the environmental assessments and determination of transit related impacts, these large developments may be compelled to contribute to the costs of Geneva Avenue improvements. Such contributions could accelerate the evolution of transit



improvements on Geneva Avenue towards a fully enhanced BRT and beyond. When possible, the proposed size of these projects will be identified and tabulated.

OPTIONAL MICRO-SIMULATIONS TASK: This work scope does not include any micro-simulation tasks. However, if needed, a basic Synchro Sim-traffic micro-simulation model could be developed from the existing Synchro LOS model. Such a simulation would likely focus on one or more key locations and key TPS measures recommended by the study team. If a more thorough, detailed micro-simulation with the ability to model restricted transit lanes is needed, additional resources and funding will be required.

Figure 2 - Pedestrians in the street at Geneva and San Jose Avenues.



Task 4 - Alternatives Analysis • Key Environmental Factors (Month 6.0)

• Evaluation Criteria (Month 6.5)

• TPS Transit Control Technology Alternatives/Integration (Month 6.5)

• Identification of Alternatives (Month 7.5)

• Draft Alternatives Analysis Report (Month 10)

• Selection of Preferred Alternative (Month 10.5)

• Final Alternatives Analysis Report (Month 13)

• Environmental Summary (Month 14)

• Final Preferred Alternative Report (Month 14)

Building on the integrated land use and roadway improvements identified and the baseline existing operating conditions established in Task 2, Task 4 will define and evaluate three levels of TPS transit alternatives along the Geneva Avenue corridor. Transit specific service objectives, like those defined by Proposition Service Standards, will be presented and refined with input from the public.

SFMTA expects that the transit alternatives will need to provide higher quality service and better performance than existing transit options. Potential improvements to enhance service quality include the following goals and concerns:

• Shorter travel time / higher operating speeds

• Increased transit reliability

• Improved service frequency

• Effectively serve local and regional trips

• Support the common community desires to accommodate travel growth without increasing traffic congestion.

• Address the concerns of adjacent neighborhoods and be sensitive to community and merchant concerns.

Key Environmental and Institutional Factors - As the initial baseline data collection effort winds down and the analysis starts, SFMTA will compile a list of key environmental factors on Geneva Avenue. The key factors (typically associated with vehicular traffic roadway capacity issues or increase transit delay) will need to be addressed in the future. In some instances, the key factors may be pre-existing or they could be attributed to local development projects along the corridor or by the transit and traffic operation measures developed by this project. At this stage SFMTA will also solicit input from Muni operators, inspectors and



union representatives as well as other City Agencies such as the Police, Public Works, and Planning Departments to identify potential additional measures that should be considered during the analysis.

Evaluation Criteria - MUNI has a TPS evaluation criteria based on Proposition E service standards. At the second work session and at the initial open house, SFMTA will present the criteria to measure the proposed TPS alternatives and its affects on the community. Such criteria may involve parking supply, local access issues related to turn restrictions, or transit travel times.

TPS Transit Control Technology Alternatives/Integration – Based on the findings of the Corridor Operations Analysis, SFMTA will identify and define potential transit technology applications for the Geneva Avenue Corridor. These options will describe individual components including but not limited to, specific signal pre-emption device types, actuated pedestrian signals, dedicated lanes, parking restrictions, bus bulbs, new turn lanes, bus stop consolidations, bus stop relocations, and terminal relocations.

Definition of Alternatives - Concurrent to the technical analysis of the existing baseline conditions and supported by feedback obtained during the initial public work session, SFMTA will develop an initial set of measures designed to meet the desired goals and objectives of the project. These measures will be presented during the second public work session where the stakeholders can share their concerns and opinions about the application of these measures and help SFMTA formulate the three alternative “packages” to be analyzed. It is anticipated that the initial alternatives developed in this task would be comprised of three sequential and incremental steps of increased complexity and effort.

Sample set of Tiered TPS Alternatives (actual alternative components may vary)

Do Nothing Alternative

1.) Low Level Alternative

2.) Moderate Level Alternative

3.) High Level Alternative

Existing Baseline Conditions

Traffic Signal Priority and Peak Hour Turn Restrictions, Bus Stop Spacing

Traffic Signal Priority, Turn Prohibitions and Side Peak Hour Restricted Transit LanesStop Sign Removal & Signal Installation

BRT Ready, Traffic Signal Priority, Turn Prohibitions, All-Day Restricted Transit Lanes

Potential transit alternatives may range from modest bus-stop and schedule enhancements to a fully enhanced bus rapid transit (BRT) ready to start planning for major infrastructure improvements. These three alternatives are anticipated to focus on signal and lane modification alternatives.

Analysis of Alternatives – Once the alternatives have been defined and public input has been reviewed, SFMTA will analyze each alternative. SFMTA analysis will evaluate each alternative using 1) standard traffic LOS measures, 2) MUNI’s transit performance criteria,



and 3) Proposition E transit criteria measures refined with input collected during the second work session and initial open house.

This evaluation task will enlist traffic engineering related support from SFMTA’s Livable Streets Program and DPT Traffic Operations Section. Staff engineers will review roadway design geometrics and signal designs. In some instances, there may be opportunities to concurrently address “arterial traffic calming issues” as they relate to the integration of transit vehicles, motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians, and to proactively address potential TPS related traffic diversions onto residential streets.

SFMTA will create an evaluation matrix and will incorporate 1) MUNI’s Proposition E criteria and 2) the criteria developed with public input during the initial Open House. Draft Alternatives Analysis Report - An initial Draft Alternatives Analysis Report will be prepared and distributed prior to the final Work Session and Open House. This report will document the evaluation procedure and explain the scoring methodology. Selection of Preferred Alternative – With the completion of the Draft Alternatives Analysis Report, SFMTA will be able to identify a preferred TPS alternative.

Draft Illustrative Proposed Improvements Plan - The recommendations will be included as an overlay on the Illustrative Proposed Improvements Plan.

The evaluation of alternatives will follow the methodology and criteria previously developed. The results will be presented in one or more summary matrices highlighting the technical characteristics as well as a comparative weighted evaluation. Summaries of the project findings, recommendations, and illustrative materials will be included in the mailing and e-mail announcing the final open house. This material will be distributed to stakeholders, transit patrons in the corridor, and other members of the community who have expressed interest in the project during the previous outreach efforts.

Final Draft Illustrative Proposed Improvements Plan - The final illustrative plan will incorporate recommendations and stakeholder issues from the final Work Session. The exhibition of this illustrative plan will be a major element of the final open house. Final Evaluation of Alternatives Report – The final alternatives analysis report will incorporate recommendations and issues of concern raised during the final Work Session. This report will support the evaluation matrices and scoring methodologies used to identify the preferred option. Final "Preferred Alternative" Report – The “Final Preferred Alternative” report will incorporate any recommendations and stakeholder issues from the final Work Session. This report will support the evaluation matrices and scoring methodologies used to identify the preferred option from the final Open House.



Environmental Summary - The environmental summary will address the potential impacts of the project as they would relate to the potential need for a subsequent environmental review. Traffic related issues would be the most likely impact to arise as a result of measures identified by this project.

Phase III – Action/Implementation Plan

Task 5 Action/Implementation Plan:

• Project Cost Estimates Phasing and Action Plan (Month 15)

• Draft Report of Study Findings (Month 16)

• Final Report of Study Findings (Month 18)

Project Phasing and Action Plan - Implementing the Preferred Alternative (selected in Task 4) requires many steps. Developing cost estimates and a conceptual funding plan will be major components of the Action/Implementation Plan. At this early stage in the project's development, it is not critical to dedicate funds from specific sources. Eventually, SFMTA will examine potential funding sources, the capacity of those sources to be available for this project, and a reasonable commitment to make the necessary public funds available. Because of the potential to collect new transit impact fees from new developers along the greater Geneva Avenue corridor, it will be important for SFMTA to have an approved plan that can incrementally improve transit operations, performance, and reliability. Transit mitigation fees may accelerate the pace of the proposed improvements on Geneva. In addition to the potential generation of private transit mitigation fees, Geneva Avenue may also qualify be the recipient of Federal funds administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). In September 2007, SFMTA requested that MTC consider the Geneva Avenue TPS Corridor a candidate project for the Federal Small Starts program.

After the development of the preliminary funding plan, SFMTA will formulate a project phasing and implementation schedule to include 1) major decision points and data study requirements, and 2) detailed requirements for inclusion of the project in regional transportation plans and programs.

Draft Report of Study Findings

Final Report of Study Findings

The Draft and Final Report of Study Findings will document the study process and contain a summary of the project’s findings. A two month review period of the draft report is anticipated to allow time for review by participants and other interested local agencies.



Prioritization

This project was prioritized in the Prop K 5 Year Prioritization Plan (5YPP) for Expenditure Plan #1 for BRT/TPS/Muni Metro Network under the “Geneva Planning” line item.

Attachment 2.Prop K FY 2007/08 Capital Budget

Cash Flow Distribution

EP # Sponsor Project Name Total FY 2007/08 FY 2008/09 FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11

TRANSIT

1 MTA (DPT)Improving Transit Operation on Van Ness North of North Point $69,400 $34,700 $34,700

1 MTA (DPT)Improving LRV and Pedestrian Safety at 9th Avenue and Irving/Judah - PS&E $60,000 $50,000 $10,000

1 MTA (DPT)Harrison Street Transit Lane between the Embarcadero and First Street $59,000 $59,000

1 MTA (DPT) Carl/Cole Transit Center Feasibility Study $20,000 $20,000

1 MTA (DPT)Market Street - Improve Signal Timing to Improve Transit Operation $45,000 $30,000 $15,000

1 MTA (DPT)19th Avenue, Lincoln Way and Cross-Over Drive Transit Stop Improvement $45,300 $45,300

1 MTA (DPT)Improving F-Line Safety and Operation at Powell and Jefferson $73,314 $73,314

1 MTA (DPT) Geneva Transit Preferential Street (TPS) $150,000 $45,000 $75,000 $30,0005 TJPA 200 Main Right of Way Acquisition $3,209,000 $3,209,0005 TJPA Right of Way Relocation Costs $3,407,000 $691,000 $2,716,000

5 TJPARight of Way Acquisition - Temporary Terminal, Transit Center, Ramps $17,155,000 $17,155,000

5 TJPAPMPC Task Order 6, Survey & Environmental Consulting Services $3,854,000 $980,000 $2,874,000

5 TJPADowntown Extension (DTX), Preliminary Engineering, Part 2 $18,350,000 $1,726,000 $13,040,000 $3,584,000

16 MTA (MUNI) Mission Bay Loop - Additional PS&E $192,000 $163,200 $28,80017 MTA (MUNI) Paratransit Vehicle Procurement $530,297 $530,29718 MTA (MUNI) Trolleybus wheelchair lift O&M $481,000 $481,00019 MTA (MUNI) F-line historic streetcar O&M $977,000 $977,000

20M MTA (MUNI) Escalator Rehabilitation and Upgrade PS&E $227,785 $113,893 $113,89221 MTA (MUNI) MUNI MMX O&M $3,151,000 $3,151,000

22M MTA (MUNI) Capital Planning and Grants Staffing $410,000 $410,000

22M MTA (MUNI)Overhead Rehab 1998-2009: Traction Power Substations - Construction $1,850,000 $555,000 $925,000 $370,000

22M MTA (MUNI) Church and Duboce Track Work Replacement $270,000 $135,000 $135,000

22M MTA (MUNI)Radio Communications System and CAD Replacement $2,692,559 $920,818 $1,559,010 $212,731

Transit Subtotal: $57,278,655 $31,555,522 $21,526,402 $4,196,731 $0

PARATRANSIT23 MTA (MUNI) Paratransit $9,670,000 $9,670,000

Paratransit Subtotal: $9,670,000 $9,670,000 $0 $0 $0

STREETS AND TRAFFIC SAFETY

24 SFCTASouth Access to Golden Gate - Doyle Drive - PS&E $2,967,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $967,000

31 MTA (DPT) New Truck for Sign Shop $65,000 $65,00031 MTA (DPT) Construction of New Signal Contract 58 $1,577,170 $584,000 $550,500 $442,670

32 MTA (DPT) Traffic Signal Controller and Cabinet Replacement $195,000 $195,00033 MTA (DPT) Traffic Sign Graffiti Program $160,000 $160,000

33 MTA (DPT)Traffic Signal Upgrades - Mission Street - Additional Construction Funds $285,000 $247,500 $37,500

Capital Budget FY 0708 Feb Capital Budget - 5 Page 1 of 3




33 MTA (DPT) Traffic Signal Controller and Cabinet Replacement $150,000 $150,000

33 MTA (DPT) Construction of Signal Modification Contract 32 $1,981,197 $1,200,000 $781,19733 MTA (DPT) Traffic Sign Graffiti Program $160,000 $80,000 $80,00034 DPW Street Resurfacing Program $13,920,000 $6,960,000 $6,960,00035 DPW Street Repair and Cleaning Equipment $642,000 $321,000 $321,00036 DPW Embarcadero Roadway O&M $394,000 $394,00037 DPW Public Sidewalk Repair $524,400 $524,400

38 MTA (DPT)Local Match-Tenderloin Pedestrian Improvements $81,100 $81,100

38 MTA (DPT)Traffic Calming - School Area Safety - Grant Matches $143,000 $74,400 $68,600

38 MTA (DPT) Traffic Calming - Planning $503,000 $251,500 $251,500

38 MTA (DPT) Traffic Calming - Implementation - Local Streets $941,070 $252,768 $353,975 $334,32738 MTA (DPT) Traffic Calming - Evaluation and Outreach $70,000 $35,000 $35,000

39 MTA (DPT)Cesar Chavez Bicycle Improvements, Sanchez to US-101 $65,100 $19,530 $32,550 $13,020

39 MTA (DPT) Division Street Bicycle Improvements, 9th to 11th $11,400 $3,420 $5,700 $2,280

39 MTA (DPT)Holloway Avenue Bike Boulevard, Lee Ave to Varela Ave $15,100 $4,530 $7,550 $3,020

39 MTA (DPT)Lee Avenue Bike Lanes, Holloway Ave to Ocean Ave $16,700 $5,010 $8,350 $3,340

39 MTA (DPT) Masonic Avenue Bike Lane, Fell St to Geary Blvd $35,600 $10,680 $17,800 $7,120

39 MTA (DPT)Portola Drive Bike Lanes, O'Shaughessy Blvd to Sloat Blvd $18,000 $5,400 $9,000 $3,600

39 MTA (DPT)Potrero Avenue Bicycle Improvements, 17th to Division $17,900 $5,370 $8,950 $3,580

39 MTA (DPT)Sagamore and Sickles Strees Bike Lanes, Alemany to Brotherhood Way $6,300 $1,890 $3,150 $1,260

39 MTA (DPT) Bicycle Safety Program FY 2007/08 $457,000 $182,800 $274,200

39 MTA (DPT) Bicycle Network Improvements - Local Match $15,000 $4,500 $7,500 $3,000

40 MTA (DPT)Local Match - Golden Gate Park Pedestrian Access Improvements $20,886 $20,886

40 MTA (DPT) Ladder Crosswalks Maintenance $42,750 $21,375 $21,37540 MTA (DPT) Accessible Pedestrian Signals Selection & Design $161,500 $104,970 $56,53041 DPW Curb Ramps $672,000 $20,000 $652,00042 DPW Tree Planting and Maintenance $933,000 $933,000

Streets and Traffic Safety Subtotal: $27,247,173 $12,919,029 $10,543,927 $817,217 $0

TSM/STRATEGIC INITIATIVES43 DOE Clean Air Program $131,000 $131,000

44 DPW Leland Avenue Streetscape Improvements Project $53,120 $26,560 $26,560

44 DPWBroadway Streetscape Improvements Project - Phase 2 - Additional Construciton $385,520 $0 $385,520

TSM/Strategic Initiatives Subtotal: $569,640 $157,560 $412,080 $0 $0

NEW PROJECTS & PROGRAMS





TBD SFCTA CityBuild Program FY 2007/08 * $473,000 $473,000

TOTAL $95,238,468 $54,775,111 $32,482,409 $5,013,948 $0

Shaded lines indicate current allocations

* CityBuild Program FY 2007/08 will be funded initially from cost savings associated with actual allocation and reimbursement requests that have been much slower than assumed in the Strategic Plan. Costs will be distributed among appropriate capital project line items as part of the Strategic Plan update in early 2008.


Attachment 3.Prop K FY 2007/08 Capital Budget Summary


Total FY 2007/08 FY 2008/09 FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11

Prior Allocations 95,088,468 55,730,111 33,407,409 5,950,948 0Current Request(s) 150,000 45,000 75,000 30,000 0New Total Allocations 95,238,468 55,775,111 33,482,409 5,980,948 0

NotesThis table shows Cash Flow Distribution Schedules for all FY 2007/08 allocations approved to date, along with the current recommended allocation(s).

Capital Budget FY 0708 Feb CF Summary - 5 Page 1 of 1

Documents

PPC020508 RESOLUTION NO. 08-51archive.sfcta.org/sites/default/files/content/Executive/Meetings/board/2008/feb...PPC020508 RESOLUTION NO. 08-51 H:\Resolutions\2008RES\R08-51 Prop K