tv [untitled] December 17, 2013 10:30pm-11:01pm PST
ago. the travel patterns, where people lived, where people were going is vastly different than what we see today. and we really need a system that relates to that dynamic change and addresses today's community's needs. so that is really led us to a goal of two things with the tep >> one improving reliability and two, improving the user experience. muni is the backbone of our community. we support a vast number of neighborhoods throughout the city, 95% of people within the city of san francisco are close to muni service. we support trips to schools, to work, to cultural events, to basically just hanging out with friends and family. and if you are a choice-rider, so somebody who has other transportation options and still picks to use transit or
transit-dependent person you still count on muni for specific thing, reliable service that allows you to get to work on time of and service that you can take to the doctor in a comfortable setting or a comfortable atmosphere. so what have we done or how are we trying to deliver such a system? we have delivered two major types of projects. one is our projects that are based on our major corridors, our highest ridership corridors. these are corridors that serve as the back [pwo-efpbt/] system. lines like the 14 mission and 5 fulton and 28/19th avenue and these lines basically accomplish 60% of our entire system. there are ten specific lines that we're addressing currently in the tep. and through this community process over the last six years
we have identified projects and proposals that we think will reduce travel time in these corridors by up to 20%. you know what does 20% mean? it sounds like a random number and to put it in prospective, i want to talk about the 5l project and related to travel time in general. we started the 5l project october 28th, so it's been about a month. we have been looking at data during that month and it's still preliminary, because you know, a month of data does not a success make. but we have noted that if you lived in say the park presidio area and going to market with the 5l, you are now making that trip five minutes faster. five minutes twice a day, because you go down and back, that is 10 minutes. you have five days a week, you have almost saved an hour of time a week by the improvements that we have made on the 5
fulton service. the trade-offs are focused on on-street parking and that is a discussion that we need to have with the community going forward. the second type of project or major improvement bucket we have identified is service changes. one of the major tenets of the tep is increasing neighborhood service. so the 28l, our proposal for the 28l is a great example. it currently runs north-south from the marina to daly city bart and operates during the school peaks. so a couple of hours in the morning and a couple of hours in the late afternoon and our proposal is to run that in the southern end, extend that service over to mission -- the mission corridor. and extend to van ness and north point and run that
service all day. so we're really connecting some of those outer neighborhoods together with all-day, fast, reliable and frequent service. also with the service proposals we're also attempted to reducing and addressing crowding. back to the 5l example, we had a lot of crowding issues in the inner portion of that line. the 5l is really -- we added 30% more capacity in the middle part of the segment there that is addressing crowding concerns and usability of the service for the people. so of course there have some trade-offs. to make these improvements that we're talking about, it's roughly a 10% increase in service hours. so obviously, a major impact on our operating budget. and we're talking about ways to kind of mitigate some of that
need, and i will go into that in more detail in a minute on reconfiguring routes and the trade-off there. i did want to notice note that no frequency direction to the evening or service are proposed as part of this process. so how do we move these benefits forward? how do we engage people and talk with where we're going and how to implement? so work to-date has been focused on our environmental impact report, eir. an eir evaluates, as director reiskin was saying, evaluates the maximum envelope of solutions that we're going to consider in future as we try to roll out these projects. the comment period for our draft eir, we released the draft eir in july and the comment period for that is closing or has closed -- excuse me, closed september 17th and the planning department is no
longer accepting further comments on the eir. and the final process for this eir should be coming to a head in the spring, early spring. but even before that process concludes, we're really eager to get out and start talking with the public about these possibilities. you know, vetting with the community. what projects we are ready to go forward with? what solutions to the reliability problems that we're facing? can we go forward with now? where do we need to go back to the drawing board and how do we balance the needs of all the stakeholders within the framework of improving reliability and improving the customer experience? so just to illustrate kind of how our outreach process is, i want to go back to the 5l for another minute. the 5l is a corridor that runs
on fulton to the beach down to transbay. and it's about 20,000 riders a day, a little less. very crowded line, especially in the middle portion of the line. the average on-time performance systemwide average floats around 60%. so it makes a great line for studying and seeing how our proposals will work. i do want to point out that first and foremost, this was a project really created in concert with the community. i mean, in the summer of 2012, we held a number of meetings to design these projects and kind of finalize the planning level on projects that we're going move forward with. and then as the project moved through the implementation process through preliminary design and detailed design, we held numerous workshops and hearings. and heard a number of competing interests, but also a lot of
items of support and working together with the community to come to a final solution. i think the final bit in the outreach process loop is maybe the most important and that is that we're continuing to seek feedback. we are evaluating the performance of the line on an ongoing basis and continuing to make tweaks and kind of improve the service to make sure that we're offering the best that we can. just a few specific examples on some of the input that we have changed: we have mostly heard comments around the service changes in the parking impacts. so some of the changes that we made to the stop locations, for instance we added a stop based on community concerns closer to bart. so that we keep that connectivity going. we dropped several right turn pockets that were in our proposal. we changed our whole proposal around mcallister and central, based on transit operator feedback, as well as the
community's concerns around that stop. we kept a stop at 37th and fulton. originally we had identified that stop to be eliminated, but talking with the senior center there and we came up with a great compromise that works for everyone in keeping that stop at 37th and folsom. and then we also to show some of our -- listening to the public, and continuing the evolutionary process, we had originally eliminated the stop at baker and mcallister and talking to the business interest and muni operators, we implemented that stop and it's back up and running. on the parking side, as i mentioned there are parking trade-offs with the 5l. we were sensitive to that. we had a lane-widening from
stanyan, to central where we took 9' lanes and converted as a way to basically improve safety for everybody on the corridor. buses can't fit in 9' lanes so we're trying to improve the safety there. and basically community feedback on parking and other issues we expanded that lane widening two blocks to the east, central to baker and allowed 20 additional parking stalls to be installed in that two-block segment. so to-date, so far, the 5l is get something pretty good reviews. riders seemed pleased with the process and the end product. we're excited to roll this process out for other lines in the tep as we continue to push for better service and involve the community. the 5l wouldn't have been the success it is had we not gotten some great feedback from people along the process, as well as
our transit operators who have helped tremendously in making this project a success. so we're really excited about our process and moving forward. back to the tep in general, much like the 5l, we have heard two major categories of concerns to-date, that relates to service changes and parking removal. these issues and this feedback that we have gotten has really helped to form our outreach plan that we're kicking off in the new year, in january. and we are going to concentrate on talking to and hearing from communities that are more likely to be impacted. we have heard from the three jacksons corridor, about elderly issues and steep grades along the corridor. we heard from the 8x stakeholders that our proposal to truncate the 8x at broadway is causing some potential concerns.
we were going to replace or are going to replace the part of the service that would not longer be served from the 8x with the new route called the 11. so no service would actually be lost at any stops, but as was rightly pointed out it does reduce or eliminate the one seat ride up to north beach and that is something that is a concern to that community. and then another example, 17-18, where we're proposing to realign it and make it more secure and most of that would be picked up by the 1.17. some there have little segment of the 18 that would no longer be served and that is causing some obvious concerns and we need to rectify that. we're designing opportunities for engagement with the communities moving forward that will balance the trade-offs and keeping in mind the ultimate
goal of more reliable service and better use for all of our users. so the next steps, just to reiterate, we're beginning outreach in january. january is really the kickoff to our implementation outreach. there are two types of proposals, like i said, the capitol and the service. on the capitol side we have ten corridors that we're proposing capital projecteds on. we have broken those up due to staff resources and we're focusing for the first three or four months, so january through march/april-ish, on five specific corridors, inner mission, 30 stockton, 5,71 on haight street and visitacion
valley and we'll be working and concentrating our outreach effort on the 14, both the downtown segment and the outer 14, as well as the 28, the j, the l and the n. on the service side, service improvements, service changes like i said, are all over with. we have roughly 45 service changes out of our 70 lines in the system that we are proposing. but we're going to be focusing our outreach starting in january on the communities most likely to be impacted. like i said, the three -- the x corridor north of broadway. the 27, reroute proposal on vallejo. so there is a number of specific locations and specific service outreach that we need to start doing starting
in january and will be going for the next several months. then the idea is in mid-2014, the first time we would bring any recommendations in front of this body for a decision on anything. obviously, it won't be the full tep or even parts of it. it will just be certain buckets and certain things that we feel ready to go, both from a community standpoint, as well as design and funding standpoint. so we'll have to be returning at several intervals through the next several years to make all of these decisions final. i would like to say, please follow our updates as we develop specific times, dates and locations on outreach starting in january. www.sftep.com or email directly
to tep sfmta or call our sfmta tep hotline. with that, i would be glad to take questions. >> thank you. excellent presentation. before we do that i believe supervisor farrell has joined us. thank you, mr. kennedy. good afternoon, supervisor. >> good afternoon, commissioners, director reiskin, mark farrell district 2 supervisor. thank you for hearing me today and allowing me to speak to you. i will do my best to keep my comment brief. i was just briefed by our controller's office about the mayor's transportation task force and i know the extreme challenges that we have, financially, especially as a transportation system. you have my commitment to work together inside of city hall, certainly now as chair of the budget and finance to find solutions to that. i agree with the sentiment of the task force and co-chair has it all san franciscans should be able to choose among many
high-quality transportation options. so the tep's end, i want to speak about you today, because it affects the district that i represent in a large fashion is the elimination of the 3 jackson line. i am here to tell you as someone who was born and raised in district 2 and raising my children there, i have ridden the 3 jackson my entire life and i know so many countless others, many who are behind me today that depend upon it for their daily lives and that eliminating that line would have a disastrous effect on the neighborhoods that i represent and i urge you to consider that. the three jackson has served the neighborhoods for decades and includes a huge senior population, a disabled population, that i have heard from and spent countless community meetings already on this topic since this idea was floated about last year. and i think as important for me, many students and staff that are part of the schools
that are in that surrounding area, there are nine schools in that very close vicinity within the three jacks and they heavily dependent upon that line to serve the schools and educate our children. several of the schools i know have written letters to you, to the mta board as i have about the elimination of the 3 jacks line. and i hope you consider that as part of your deliberations. i will tell you that my office has been engaged and i will commit to continue to engage and outreach with the neighborhoods of district 2 and i am offering here to help engage in the community as i have done so far. i know sfmta staff has done it to some degree, but as proposeded today with elimination of the 3 jacks
line, the neighborhoods have not been listened to. the statistics that are in the books don't paint the full picture. this is not just about peak ridership times. this is about other populations in san francisco that ride our buses, and use our transportation system in no one peak times. you know, is there a cost-savings to this elimination? that hasn't been talked about yet and that has to be part of the process. and to me, as well, the alternatives that get proposed, simply to say go to the one california, take those. this is a steep area, you know? topographically, these are seniors and it's not so easy to walk a few blocks and we're talking about vulnerable populations in a steep part of town. we love our city and our topography makes us who we are geographically, but we have to
think about that with our transportation system. we know san francisco needs a reliable transportation system and i fully support the process that is happening, but with the 3 jacksons, at the expense of riders, many who are seniors, disabled and especially those who depend upon using the three jacksons to teach and go to school i don't think reflects the values of san francisco and i ask you to reconsider that. i commit to you my support to help engage with my community to help do that. thank you very much. >> thank you, supervisor. [ applause ] members, let's move to the public hearing. we'll hear from the public at this point. mr. kennedy, i'm sure we'll be talking to you a little later on. miss boomer. >> we have members of the
public here and also in 408. so if you hear your name in 408, if you would make you your way to this room to address the board. [ reading speakers' names ] >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. >> i grew up on the 39. i rode the ecar, which was a streetcar the size of the cable care. i'm a native and i ride the no.
3. i ride the no. 3 from one terminus to the other terminus. from walnut and california to bart or muni. and the california street doesn't do that. it doesn't stop at a connection. you have to walk a couple of blocks. and during the winter, during rain, and all of that kind weather, but i have also rode the cable car when it went all the way to presidio, the
california cable car. thank you >> thank you sir. [ reading speakers' names ]. >> mark christenson, third generation san franciscan. very simple put there are elements of the transit effectiveness project that need to be reevaluated before implementation. there are two elements that many believe are flawed. getting from point a to point b is the supposed time savings for the individual transit rider or for the muni vehicle? at appears that the proposal are for the vehicle to get to point a to point b at the sacrifice of the passenger to get from starting point a to their final destination point b. elimination of stops. this means that the individual rider will have to walk a greater destination and the
time it takes to walk from the discontinued stop -- this does not help the individual getting from point a to point b and this certainly hinders the elderly, the disabled and parents with small children by eliminating stops. one of the best features of muni it has convenient stops for its ridership, but yet, that seems to be in jeopardy. please note it will still take the same amount of time for a passenger to board and disembark a vehicle whether it's at one stop or another. so it's not a major savings by eliminating stops. the other element, stoping to pick up passengers and blocking lanes. every time a bus stops -- it blocks a traffic lane and that will only further back up
traffic along the busy lane and thus result in delaying the next bus -- how does this speed up service? on paper these issues may look fine. if practicality, it will only add to the frustration of the public. thank you. >> next speaker. >> alex long, anne long. wayne fong. >> my name is alex long and on behalf of the save no. 3 jackson committee i would like to express our appreciation to discuss why the 3 jackson means so much to our community. along with five other presenters we will describe our community, introduce the various groups who are here today and were able to make the meeting and explain the impact of removing the no.. explore what we understand are the reasons for eliminating it and the resulting magnitude of the savings.
ask whether this is consistent with the city goal of transit-first? and finally, request that you the board consider our information, as well as the significant public support for our position if we shouldn't rather be instead working together to save the no. 3 jackson and increase ridership? so let me describe our community of 60 square blocks, consisting of portions of pacific and presidio heights, transected by the no. 3 jackson. we are 1500 regular riders getting on and off the no. 3 jackson in this area. we do 4,000 round-trips per week, 650 of these round-trips are within our community. 28% of our ridership is greater than 65 years of age. we have students and staff at
nine local schools. we have tourists staying at three local hotels. we feel that it is important for us to all of us to use the no. 3. the level of importance is reflected by the petition and emails that you have received recently. all of us support muni and all of us would like to continue riding the no. 3 jackson. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. >> anne long. wayne fung. barbara bocce. john paxton. >> good morning, miss long. >> good afternoon. i simply wanted to introduce you to the people who have gone to the trouble of coming to this meeting, but that is not really going to be possible, considering that we are split in two rooms. >> that is of course for safety reasons and fire reasons. >> i understand. >> good.
>> maybe you could imagine double the number. there are quite a few elderly people, including one lady that i met who is over 85 who came down had this meeting today. if you are over 65 and you are here to support the no. 3 bus, would you please raise your hand? we also have students from university high, the san francisco ballet, scared heart, san francisco public montessori and the students mostly aren't here, but some of their representatives are here. if you are a student or representing students would you please raise your hands? we have professionals and patients from institutes such as the smith eye institute. i'm not sure if any of them are here, but if you are -- please raise your hand. thank you. there were also a great number
of other people that don't fall into these categories, but as one told me, i'm a marine major bus rider. so if you don't fall into these categories would you please raise your hand. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. [ reading speakers' names ]. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon directors. my name is dr. wayne fung. i am a retired ophthalmolgist, that is a retired eye surgeon. my office was and is still at the corner of webster and clay, so i know a little bit about this neighborhood. i was at that position for 50 years. cpmc, the pacific campus has 400 nurses every shift. so
that is 1200 people a day. there is a permanent staff of 300 and when it moves the building is going to stay there and it will be converted to outpatient services. the talk now is mainly cancer treatment and breast healthcare. on filmore street, close to cpmc, there is the eye institution, where josh millet, who is on the list, will address you and tell you what they do at smith keteral -- across there smith keteral is pets unlimited, only 24-hour pet hospital