Skip to main content

tv   MTA Board of Directors 111715  SFGTV  November 22, 2015 6:00pm-9:36pm PST

6:00 pm
6:01 pm
6:02 pm
6:03 pm
6:04 pm
6:05 pm
6:06 pm
6:07 pm
>> not real front line stuff, but important in terms of back house. we have a lot of skilled professionals
6:08 pm
within the agency, many of whom are getting close to retirement and we don't necessarily have a lot of folks to come in after them, so we are really happy to be about to launch a partnership with a couple of the machinist union recollect local 1414 and electrician union local 6 together with the city. we'll start apprenticeship programs for a number of our most critical difficult to fill and mission critically important craft positions we need. these are the fonegs maintaining the muneee and traffic and signal systems. we are joining to create these apprenticeship programs modeled an successful programs in place in the sit a such as
6:09 pm
labors local 261 and in addition we joined a national partnership of transit agencies that are led by a organization called the transportation learning center to develop rail car technician program. a small effort on our part we contribute to a larger effort that will create paths inside those type of jobs. the partnership got 3 quarter of a million dollar grant from department of labor and will participate as a part of the implementation of that grant and somewhat timely at the beginning the month the obama administration announced the first ever national recognition of apprentices. it is something we in san francisco go to local hire program for contract employees and internally recognize the importance and excited to
6:10 pm
create the internship programs not just so we have a workforce coming into dlaess kraestz the maintenance needs but to create opportunities for san franciscans to get meaningful good study career jobs and careers. we are excited about that. and then lastly, director boarden made reference and there is a lot of discussion about the super bowl and overhead wires so want to touch on it briefly. it was back in april i think when the host committee of the super bowl, for the super bowl announced their desires to have a super bowl fan village at the foot of market street. there was a big graphic on the front of the newspapers. it wasn't until this past week people got interested and excited about it. we have work would the host committee with the other city agencies since actually before that time to figure out
6:11 pm
how to make this a great event. we have lots of big events in san francisco from the parades to americas cup toother activities that make use of our streets, take advantage in a good way to the the streets and bring peep tool the struts and that is all good. it is our rowel role to make sure the events can kbungz people good too and from safely to the events and also at the time making sure that we are not significantly adversely impacting the rest of us who are not participating in these events. san francisco has to move z people have to get to work and school and to where ever they want to go so that is how we are approaching this, making sure the event is safe and accessible but make sure the rest of us are not too adversely discorrupted in the process. part of what their desire is for some structures in the
6:12 pm
roadway towards the foot of market, there are state safety regulations that don't allow structures to be within a certain distance of overhead wires so the extent we permit structures to be in the streets it requires overhead line remubl. we have not agreed to anything, we are discuss and negotiateating with them. we have been trying to help them understand that we need to minimize any disruption to our transit system and to the cost to the extent there is overhead line removal we agree upon they will cover the cost for that. we already have a service plan that allows all the buses that go down market street to get to terminals within a block or 2 of where they normally go so we have the beginning of
6:13 pm
the transportation plan the soaper bowl and are committed to make sur the event works. our next meeting to give a little broader picture of all the transportation plans associated with the super bowl. >> member thofz board have questions? >> i haven't receivedgy indication a member of the public wishes to address you on any matter discussed by mr. riscon. i don't see anybody making a move forward, so moving on. item 8 advisory council report. >> mr. weaver here? >> yes. >> good afternoon mr. weaver. >> good afternoon. today the recommendations i will go through
6:14 pm
resulted from discussions at the november 5 meeting which primarily involved the revaluation of the residential parking program and also the commuter shuttle program. first motion here is that the sfmta-cfc recommends the agency investigate parking permits to the number of licensed drivers in any given household . the cac recommends sfmta investigate making temporary parking passes easier to obtain. i think the model that was mentioned in the discussion is same day. perhaps printing it out. the next motion had it do with parking permits. the cac recommends
6:15 pm
the sfmta investigate eliminating parking permits for buildings built with fewer parking spaces than residential units. the next motion was introduced but failed of adoption. the ca cr rks recommends the planning department do a full environmental impact report and i believe that has to do with the shuttle program. next motion also failed adoption. cac urges the boardf directors to remove the computer shuttled buses from the red zones and create shuttle hubs or legal spaces that are in compliance with the law. the next motion, motion 6 did pass. the cac urges mta board to investigate pricing by weight of computer
6:16 pm
shuttle bus to encourage appropriate sized buses and cross straet recoverry road ware. the next one the cac recommended parking control officers tasks with monitoring the shuttle bus. motion number 8, the cac recommends the board of directors adopt the commuter shuttle program condition on inclusion of the other recommendations related to it. the next motion is not about either of those subjects, it is about the geary brt program. the caa recommends prior to adopting the final configuration for the geary brt a study be done
6:17 pm
regarding the proposed geary light rail project and that the geary brt be designed in a manner to facil thait the rail project including making the segment between palm and 27 avenue rail ready including surface work, [inaudible] in order to avoid disruptive demolition in con junction with the rare project in the future . that's it. student>> any questions or comments kblrks before we move on, we have a fire code which doesn't allow peep tool stands if so if you can find a seetd in the room. we also have a overflow room in the north light court. those members who wish to address the board seated in the north light court
6:18 pm
we'll read multiple cards ahud so you will have plenty of time to make your way up to this room; item 9 public comment. opportunity to address the board in matterer within the jurisdiction of is rks fmta but not on todays agenda. we'll start with john lowell followed by alice beerman and bob dockens. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon member the board of san francisco. my name is john alex lowell and serve as the pedestrian safety advisory committee and senior member of the san francisco bike coalition since december 99. i come to you to site 3 points of my concern and encouragement. i encourage you to
6:19 pm
engage the state. engage such 2 years ago when you proposed changing in parking permits for people with disabilities in san francisco. i encourage you again to approach cal trans to talk about automatic speed enforcement. you have done such by approaching the state directly before and i encourage you to do such again particularly in the need of enforcing speed limits in san francisco to prevent any collision that can lead to any injury or fatailty. please approach the state. the second point i encourage you to work well with particularly [inaudible] and barbara garcia and directors of city agencies to coordinate changing in street ways
6:20 pm
as there has been collisions that have occurred because of delayment of it that you had recommended of stop signs and stop lights and encourage you to coordinate that. lastly, i encourage you to really consult with the mtc about closing of market street transit lines because it will effect construction of the transbay terminal and the san trans bus line on second street so you need to consult with those other agencies and the mtc. thank you. >> next speaker, please >> alice beerman followed by bob darkens and rosy gozauly. >> good afternoon mr. beerman >> good afternoon, my name is alice beerman. i think some ofia know me, i am here to represent people with disabilities and asking you to
6:21 pm
not reroute the bus 33 line. i know you have what on your plate making changes and making sure safety is number 1 like you said earlier so i want to ask you again, please do not reroute the 33. people with disabilities and seniors have to get to the hospital and they should not have to transfer. thank you so much. >> next speaker >> bob dockens followed by rosy gozauly and herbert wineer who is the last person to submit a speaker card . >> my name is daub docken and speak ing for the veterans at the veterans hospital cht the 38 bus that comes to the hospital, when the bus comes he discharges passengers and close the door and most the patients are on wheelchair, sticks or something and it gets cold. if you can ask the driver to get on at the hospital
6:22 pm
without closer the door i appreciate it. that is what we need because we are old and when your bones get cold you are finished. >> next speaker, please >> rosy gozauly and herbert wineer. >> good afternoon >> good afternoon board members. my name is rosy gozauly and live at 239 claiten and every week i visit a friend who lives where [inaudible] fredric and belvedere. i called the 311 number spokingen with people and received a callble this issue. with was going to be looked into and this is months. i'm very happy i just heard that you say safety is number 1. that is a good thing. i want to talk about
6:23 pm
fredric between claiten and coal. there is a stop sign at claiten and coal but there is no crossing lines at fredric and belvedere and according to my friend who owns his house for about 40 years in the last 5 or 6 years the traffic is crazy. people drive very fast, it is downward slope and i notice quh i cross fredric to get to his house walking up belvedere, if there is any sizable truck, suv they can't see me crossing and it is taking ones life in their hands. i come here today to speak about the shuttles, but i think
6:24 pm
that after reading on line about how quickly one of thsupervisors said he would have stop signs put at bay and buchanan because of the unfortunate accident of the 12 year old boys i don't want to wait at thaintersection for something like this to happen before the board takes action to put opstop sign. i don't think crossing signs are enough. >> next speaker, >> herbert rineer is the last speaker regarding general public comment. >> herbert wineer. ip to follow up on the paratransit presentation that was made at the last meeting. one concern i have is the paratransit may be overloaded. they do a commendable job and trying their best to serve all the
6:25 pm
people they can, but when you force people to walk a quarter of a mile to the bus stop, that will create more demand on paratransit. they will be over taxed . the present arrangement the buses are moreachy sessable is workabilism you create more of a problem, you create more of a buden on paratransit. it is difficult to reserve paratransit vehicle tooz begin with and it is only a quarter of a mile to the bus stop. this seems to be particularly wasteful when you eliminate bus stop squz consaltidate and modify bus runs. this is socially unrealistic. now, i made the reference at the last meeting there was rational planning and it is perfectly rational with supply z demand, but it is like bomb people 50 thousand miles
6:26 pm
in the air, you don't see the damage below. there is another qualification too. when you bomb people 50 thousand feet in the air you bomb the enemy and in this situation you bomb your own passengers. >> mubing to consent calendar. these are considered routine unless [inaudible] no members of the public have use muni joan and white curb zoning1 -staff
6:27 pm
made request for modification to the transportation code. it modifys section 914 [inaudible] av and the language that would be added reads as follows, a description the means by which applicants have considered the san francisco board of supervisors march 2015 labor harmony resolution including steps taken to address the concerns set forth in such resolution and agreements or documents evidencing such steps as well as information regarding shuttle driver schedules including split shift, work hours, working condition squz wages. and then additional language would be added, a new number, d would be ated that states the permitee shall provide notice to sfmta of labor dispute in which
6:28 pm
it is involved that has a potential to cause disruption of service. staff asked a amendment to the resolution be made too as follows, the new resolve clause reads the san francisco transportation agency finds [inaudible] in attachment a the resolution supports the determination the proposed commuter shuttle program and transportation amendments are exempt from environmental review section 15-301 and 8. incorporates findings by this reference fully set forth >> should we ask on that first? >> no it is recommended that you hear
6:29 pm
the staff presentation and take public comment at the end when you consider the entire motion you would consider these 2 motions prior. >> let's have the staff report. >> thank you. hank wilson from sustainable streets division will give ooverview of what is before you for consideration. >> good afternoon chair nolan and membersism thank you for having me. i am the project manager on the commuter shuttle program and know about 2 years a lot of folks have worked hard and did a lot of outreach and this is a culmination of what we are working on so excited to be here. this slide tells what i'll talk about today. history and context for why we have a commuter pilot program and talk about the pilot program is drawing to a close
6:30 pm
january of next year. talk about the evaluation we did and talk about the proposal commuter shuttle program before the board. the upgrades we made to the program and how we built upon what we learned >> before you proceed, >> joined by supervisor wiener who is here and want to talk about this and has another commitment shortly. you care to address the board before the presentation? good afternoon supervisor wean, >> i am here today to encourage you to adopt the commuter shuttle program and also continue to work closely with the shuttle providers to make sure that impacts on our neighborhoods continue to be addressed and reduced and also to
6:31 pm
encourage you to fully implement the labor harmony provision i know is in active discussion and reflects both the language and the spirit of labor harmony revolution i authored at the board of supervisors. i really appreciate the work that chs done during the pilot program. the data that was produced is incredibly useful and actually very reflective of some of the more informal surveys that happened before so we know of course there are i think 8500 san francisco residence that are relying on the shuttle to get to work. we know this removes cars from the road because about half of these residence would drive by themselves if they didn't have the shuttle
6:32 pm
and the vast majority of the people riding the shuttles if they evaporated tomorrow still live in san francisco. the notion that the shuttles are causes gend fiication regardless of the relevancy to ceqa, it is simply not connected to the data that we have. people live where they want to live and whether they have access to the shuttles they will live here, so we need to address the issues by housing policy not by depriving people of the ability to get to work using mass transportation. we also know that we have seen through pilot program the conflict with muni at bus stops is reduced. i represent a district that is probably the most impacted by the shuttles and probably has the most residence who ride the shuttles
6:33 pm
and i want to thank mta to working to try to disperse the shuttles mpt we had 26 street and duncan street that early on were very heavily impacted by too many shuttles going down the streets and the agency worked hard to disperse the shuttles. there are areas of impact and the agencies continue to work to try to reduce the impacts. the shuttle program is good one, it gets people out of their cars, it does what we are scg people and employers to do. to help people get to work in a way that are not driving in a car and sole driver. i want to encourage you to adopt whatever amendments need to be
6:34 pm
adopted to implement the labor harmony resolution and provision and to make sure that we have and encourage labor harmy to shuttle operators and employees. as the press reported correctly we have a situation where many drivers are earning poverty wage squz can't afford to live anywhere and don't get paid for the slit shifts and it is just not a good situation. we need to make sure that all of not just our employees at mta but everyone driving is treated fairly and workers have living wages and have benefits and able to survive in the bay areas. the last thing we need is have labor unrest disrupting not just the shuttles but muni and general traffic so that is why we passed the labor harmony
6:35 pm
resolution and think is a good idea for the agency to adopt that. thank you and i urge you to adopt the program. >> thank you supervisor wiener. : mr. willtion. >> thank you again and thank you supervisor wiener. the supervisor got the numbers right so you may hear me repeat a few things he said but i'll push forward anyway. the first thing i want to talk about is background and context about commuters shuttles and why we have them. why they are in san francisco. commuter shuttles have been around for decades especially the intercity shuttles that take people to places within san francisco and [inaudible] the silicon valley shuttles grow out of transportation demand policy in the south bay so places like mountain view and palo alto. you have
6:36 pm
10 thousand jobs but don't want 10 thousand cars. we all know that btd the jobs housing imbalance so places in silicon valley say we want 10 thousand jobs and don't want [inaudible] a lot of people have chose to live in san francisco and if you live and work in san francisco it feels the shuttles are san francisco issue but they are not. the shuttles go all over the bay areas and make a lot of stops after they leave san san francisco. more context for the pilot program, by law mta isn't aloud to ban shuttles but we can regulate them. shuttles are free to stop in white zones and curb space so the mta's role is regulate the
6:37 pm
movement of the shuttles and do what wie can do to minimize their impacts and maximum the benefit. they are a increasing presence on the street and that is why the city stepped in with the pilot program. a goal is regulate commuter shuttles and it is important to remember the aspect of regulation is sootoo have someone to call. we can send out enforcement or connect them with the shuttle operator and they have recourse when issues pop up. the pilot created a network of shared muni and white zones starting with about 101 and now there is 124. before the pilot started we had what we called the wild west where shuttles stopped where they wanted to rep. joe atkins lee 250 zones and have cut that in half. we
6:38 pm
know about the permit fee it is 3.67 cents and that fee goes to pay for all the cost of administering the program and allows to target enforcement and do data collection about where the shuttles are, how many people they pick up and how many shetals in the city determine if this is a success. time line, the board approved the policy jan 2014, launched august 2014 and released the evaluation document early last month and the reason we are here because it concludes at the ends of january and want something in place to regulate the shuttles after the pilot ends january 31. the pilot evaluation report focuses on the 6 topics here on the slide. the data comes from 3 main sources, the first is from
6:39 pm
shuttle operators. stop events, boardings, the miles traveled by the shuttle and occupancy of the shuttle. we also did a rider survey where we asked the shuttle riders what their transporpation choice would be without a shuttle. we looked at 20 zones in june of 2014 and those same zones in june of 2015 to record what is happening at the stops. whether shuttles are getting in the way of muni or block pedestrians, thinks like that. so, the first thing we look at is stutal stop events. there are 124 zones in the system now. as of july 2015 shuttles made 2978 stop events on a average day around the city. that is about 29 percent increase from what they did at the beginning the pilot and
6:40 pm
that results from 2 different factors, one is a consolidation of shuttle activity. before the pilot we had the wild west and the pilot consolidated them to the network. there has probably been increase in shuttle activity around the city around the last 16 month. van ness is the busiest and it is a lot top heavy zone. top 20 percent of zones see [inaudible] shuttle ridership, like supervisor wiener mentioned there are 17,000 one way boardings a day. 76 percent are on the regional shuttles and 24 on intercity. that is [inaudible] in terms of we asked people where they live and work and a lot of
6:41 pm
folks live in the mission. mission bay, [inaudible] most people work in san francisco if they ride intercity sut shuttle or south bay. we asked shuttle riders whether they own aker and 45 percent said they didn't own a car and another 45 percent of them said the shuttles are the main reason they didn't own a car. we also asked how they would get to work if they didn't have a shuttle. 47 percent said they drive alone and 27 said public transit and the orange slice of the pie says 5 percent of people would move closer to work. even if the shuttles were not available they wouldn't leave the sitd city. using the 45 percent number we estimate that shuttle said lenameinate
6:42 pm
8 thousand one way car trips a day. that is like taking all the cars of 24th street a day. another wiato look is the shuttles eliminate 4.3 million vehicle miles of travel every month. turning to the field data collection where we look at individual zones, 12 out of the 20 zones saw no muni shuttle conflicts. the shuttle isn't in the way. on the whole we saw 2.7 percent of shuttle stop events lead toog a muni blockage and that equates to about less than one blocking of a shuttle every 2 hours. we saw 35 percent decrease in the rate of shuttle blockage from the prepilot to the current pilot. a couple notes, we moved some the stops to try to move things away from placing where we saw conflicks and the
6:43 pm
two bustiest zone jz high conflict zones in the prepilot period is moved to shuttle only zones where we eliminated muni conflicts. looking at whether shuttles block the travel or bike lane they block 35 percent the time. far side zones are a little more-better in this regard because the far side zone allows the bus driver to pull over and get outf the travel lane. this is something we take seriously and address in the prose proposal. we looked whether shuttle block the cross walk. out of 706 stop events shuttles blocked the cross walk 6 times which is less than 1 percent. anything over 0 submit
6:44 pm
good but less than 1 percent is not as bad as it could have been. what is depicted in the graphic is a concern that we were focusing on which is that front-the driver in the front attempting to make a right turn around a stop shuttle bus may be blocked from seeing pedestrians so that is concern because the driver may not be able to see people. that happened 16 times which is about 2 percent. 12 of the 16 happened at a specific sewn zoen at lum bard and pierce which is the busiest zone. this is something that goes away if there is a far side zone because there is nothing to block,. quick stats about enforce: there was a shuttle detail to go out and parole the shuttle zones and corridors. they
6:45 pm
issue about 100 citations a month and those are split between permitted shuttle vehicles who were doing something wrong like double parking or blocking the travel lane and not permitted buses trying to use a permitted zone when they were nolt not allowed to do so. it is important to know this is only citations issued to shuttle buses. there were thousands of other citations issued in muni zones by enforcement officers keeping the zones clear for muni and shuttles. a take away is enforcement can't be everywhere. 100 a month may sound good or bad but viewed in light of 60 thousand stop events a month officers can't see everything. we also collected a lot of feedback during the pilot program over the 16 months. we
6:46 pm
got calls and e-mails and feedback from supervisors offices and about 69 percent the feedback focused on large buses on small streets. the shuttles are not weg come on the street or shouldn't come to san francisco at all. the size of the streets is what the community feedback focused on. a little about the regulatory iproach. we think it was successful. the operateers paid their fees on time, they were responsive with rez dents issues or update the registration. i talked about enforcement challenges and one challenge we hope to address going forward is we anticipate get a lot of gps data from the operators and
6:47 pm
knowing where all the buses are a given time and that turned out to be a more of a challenge both internal and external. it is something we'll do vote more resources to because i think having up toidate real time data on the bus location is important to target enforcement. that brings to the commuter shuttle program and this is a quick review of the key dates. one of the dates isn't on there is november 5, cac which you heard from mr. weaver about earlier and that is fairly well attened as well so think the word got out and a lot of the surprisers put notice in the news letters so tried to get word on the outreach. more on outreach, we have a open house november
6:48 pm
4 which was well attended. the outreach, these tr the main concerns that are fairly well addressed with the proseal. the question about appropriateness of commuter shuttlesism safety and training requirements which we as director reiskin eluded to, these buses are regulated by the cpc and go through the state and chp training requirement jz we also require them to watch a large vehicle driver safety video that the sfmta created focused on large vehicle drivers drivering on city streets with people walking and biking. also no matter what peoples tack were on the program they asked about the fee, how much you charge and what do you charge in the future and enforcement of shuttle behavior which we talked about. the other
6:49 pm
inputs we use is before the board is the evaluation results. consideration of the amturnatives proposed and as supervisor wiener mentioned the labor harmony resolution. the first major upgrade we think we are making to the pilot program for the ongoing program is large busing defined as anything longer than 35 street are to stay on the major street which goes a long way to address the chief community concern that the buses are too large for the smaller residential streets. we'll also have increase enforcement and more officers dedicate today the program and covered by the fee the shuttle operators pay and think that wiilgo along way to keeping traffic
6:50 pm
moving. another thing we'll do is capital improvements at location where there is shuttle and muni. all the things we did with muni forward and vision zero. the shuttles benefit from a lot of these things so think they need to pay their fair share. we'll expand or gps data system and bring that all in house and expend more resources to make sure we are robust real time gps data knowing br wherethe buses are whether we can use to target enforcement and [inaudible] so i think that will help move things and also increase the publics confidence we are tracking what is going on and following up. another concern we heard is about the emissions of the large diesel vehicles so address
6:51 pm
that we introduced the model year turn over requirements. at soon as the launches any new vehicles may have to be 2012 or newer. by 2020 all vehicles will have to be 2012 or newer and 2020 starts a new requirement. that way we keep windup the federal and state regulations and keep the cleanest vehicles out there. one thing we heard from some the smaller shuttle operators, the non profit jz government operators that did or didn't participate is the fee for participation was ownerous for there baujts so plan on creating a rule with if your shuttle is free andope frn the public you can use the zones for free as long as you comply with the permit requirements and think that will help non profits and government shuttle operators that areope toon the
6:52 pm
public that can't pay the fee. addressing supervisor wieners labor harmony union, all shuttle operators are required to praid provide a plan. addressing the fee that is a question everyone asks. right now the fee is set at cost recovery. we have not determined what the fee would be under a ongoing program but given the fact we incorporate fl creased resource frz data processes and capital improvement we are fairly certain it will go up but by how much we don't know and will come back to the the board whether we have something definitive. that all i got for the presentation. happy to answer questions.
6:53 pm
>> let's take [inaudible] >> mr. chairman because we have a few member nofz public in the overflow room on the second floor i'll call 5 names ahead to allow them ample time to get up to the room. christine rogers, michael cursener, mar law night, cathy delukea and doug block. >> good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to speak chair and members the board. i have been speak continuously with various sfmta folks and city supervisors over the past 2 years regarding the pilot program and the commuter shuttles in general i have to say i feel we finally made good progress and appreciate the fact the sfmta feem is work closely with us and heard our voices from carly
6:54 pm
pain to hank wilson and others, so i want to say i want to support the new program and hope that we get it approved and also we continue to make improvements. what i wanted to also state is just a little background, i have been a rezvent of [inaudible] for the past 15 years and a residence of san francisco for 25, the pilot was very disruptive and destructive for the small neighborhoods. my street, 26 street ha50 corporate buses going down it at the kart the program and we eleebiated some of it but it isn't enough and that is why we need this program is implement the changes because the pilot as it stands today isn't enough. i expressed 3 concerns, one is we right size and green the buses so it is relate today buses. as hank mentioned it is about the size thrf
6:55 pm
buses. the large buses are not appropriate on the streets and cause major congestion and degidation. if you google my address you can see the street depressions in the street. besides safety issue. further to this we need to green the buses and as hank mentioned t is a good start. we would like to see more green policies but what is proposed in the new bram is a good start. there is a layer of permanent soot on my house and vegetation. thank you very much. >> michael cursener followed by -- >> good afternoon. mike cursener and a noley valley residence. while the current proposal will succeed in moving the extremely noising and
6:56 pm
enormous shuttles that run up and down the streets from early in the morning to late at night it does nothing to eliminate the problems the shuttles create. since the rule limits shuttle buses over 35 feet long on non arterial streets that is longer than my land is wide. both major and minor arterials what is to stop the companies to switch to a larger feed of shorter buses particularly if the maimger stops not on major or minor arterials are not eliminated or moved? i'm a environmental consultant. i work with manufacturers large and small to help them meet environmental and social regulatory and customer requirements that impact their products. it is the rare corporation and rarer industry that leads by example and does the right thing without external
6:57 pm
pressure and regulation. this isn't limit today performantance but extend to every aspect of their existence. corporations want to do what is in their best financial interest. they can be at odds with community or stakeholder interests. there is a solid place for government regulation in the capitalist society like ours. should the rule be implemented? i expect internal pressure on employee to keep the same routes will result in replacement of the shuttles with? crease nub of sub35 foot modsal. i urge you to [inaudible] further note that i observed shuttle riders drivering to get to stops on 30th street.
6:58 pm
>> marla knight, cathy delukea, doug block, mark gleesen and [inaudible] >> marly knight and north beach residence. i oppose and neighbors oppose the shuttle program as it is currentsly structured. i appreciate the shuttle buses take cars off the road but the use the muni stops is a problem. i use muni regularly on van ness and the google buses park in front and muni can't get around and passengers have to disembark in the street where it isn't safe especially for elderly and disabled people getting off the bus. what i would like to see, i propose that the google buses, the big ones go to the edge of the city and perhaps unloud the passengers maybe at a cal train station and take
6:59 pm
private jitanys that are owned by google and [inaudible] and yahoo and park in the white spaces. the white spaceerize set up for small vehicles and think that is a good solution. north beach not only do we have there google buses, butmany tour bus squz it is one bus too many. i hope you seriously consider my proposal using jitanys. >> thank you. >> cathy delukea, doug block, mark gleesen, roam alacy, tim policyen >> good afternoon. my contacty delukea, praem manager with walk san francisco. we know a lot of people are concerned with the impacts the shuttle program has on housing and
7:00 pm
gentrification. we are here to talk brt pedestrian safety. we think it is important mta reluments shuttle in the city. it allows mta to require all drivers to be trained on safe driver practices and allows the city to charge a fee that covers the capital improvement on the street and requires better emission standsards. we are excited about the filegdsings in the shuttle program that there is decrease in [inaudible] and make the streets safer for all use rbs. we would like to see modification tooz the program to make it safer and more transparent. first we would like to development of a single clear way to feedback to be reported. we heard from a lot of the community partners about dangerous behaviors on the small non arterial
7:01 pm
streets of shuttles blocking intersection or muni stop squz people have to board in the travel lane so we are worried about ped safety there and think the mta should have a way to find out about the dangerous behaviors. we also like to see the near side shuttle stops moved. as staff mentioned when and have a near side shuttle stop the visibility in intersection is compromisedism 13 percent of inshuttle stoperize at near side locations in unsignal nrbt section squz would like those moved immediately if possible. the rest the near side stops when chare 40 percent the stop we like to see those moved in the future. that's it. >>dying block, mark gleesen, roam alacy, tim policyen, patrick mu shet shah >> good afternoon, my name
7:02 pm
isdying block with teamsters joint counsel 7 represented 100 thousand teamsters in california including 12 thousand in san francisco here today to speak in strong support of this. i think we are very sensitive to the issues the critics of the program has raised but thing from our perspective that is pornts is one way to klaess income sknr equality is for workers to organize a union. that is what bus drivers for transportation and compass transportation who drive for facebook and apple and yahoo and junentic are doing for the union. the facebook drivers were cat pulted in the union over night. there are other drivers who are trying to organize who don't have a union, all the
7:03 pm
google drivers, the droirfbs for bowers transportation and to be honest sometimes those fights can get ugly and think that is why supervisor wiener was smart and keen to the meeting to talk about the importance of having a labor harmony resolution. that was backed by the throefs board and the idea being if those fights do turn ugly which they sometimes do it will not impact the 800,000 people who dependent on muni service and that is a goal we all share. so, we are very happy to have worked with your staff and want to thank director reiskin, mr. mu gire and others that helped us on this and again would urge you to pass this including the labor harmony provision jz make this a permanent program. >> mark gleesen, rome alying,
7:04 pm
[inaudible] >> good afternoon, mark gleesen with local teamsters 665. we do support this proposal as it is presented with the inclusion the labor harmony clause that we believe wisely the supervisors passed. when you think about working drivers work for the private sector to fight for improvements many people would be appalled at. sure you have seen media reports. what is normally confined to a private sector work site will spill out to the public red zones. we do very much appreciate all the work the staff has done on the proposal which includes the
7:05 pm
labor harmony piece and encourage you to keep that in and hopefully we can have a good program for shutting buses that adhere to all labor law jz state and government and local. >> rome alacy, tim paulson, >> good afternoon roam mu lys, presidents of teamsters joint council 7 and my speaking fall synchronize to the category of how many teamsters does it take to say the thing. i like to reaform what my 2 brothers said i make a quick point that since the facebook contract was neshed and include the compass which brings in another 200 drivers under a union contract we have seen a big increase in the quality of the drivers coming to work for these companies. the people well trained,
7:06 pm
experienced in the industry and that are now flocking to these jobs because they are good middle class jobs with good wage squz benefits. for the first time holidays where when there was thanksgiving people would lose 20 percent the salary. they will now have paid holiday squz paid vacation and sick leave t. is a vast improvement and improved the ability to have safe, experienced quality drivers in the industry and that is attribute today what you are doing and hopefully what you will do on the labor harmony provision. >> tim paulson, patrick mu net shah, rosy gulolly [inaudible] >> my name is tim paulson exponent tev drecktder the san francisco
7:07 pm
labor council and represent over 100 year union and 100 thousand men and women in the public and prifent sector and there aremany members in muni and local representative from 258 that is here and others involved in transportation. the largest issue whether you saw it played out at the election or the board meetings for wecking many and women the biggest issue is affordability. whether that has to-do with jobs or the obscene housing price jz one of the things we are doing and the unions are doing is take on the wealth generated in silicon valee to make sure there are good jobs coming out of it. it is a tool we need to fight affordability especially in san francisco. the teamsters decide to take that on full-fledged with pover jobs
7:08 pm
that are turned into living wage jobs with benefits. as the supervisor said deal wg labor peace is also very important and again public or private sector is what we like to have is labor peace so people have a voice at work when they want to join a union and fight for their benefits. consider the waif this is moving and it is a dialogue in san francisco about affordability. there are no final answers because people are leebing the city is we have to move forward. the labor piece stuff and the movement forward in termoffs the program we support in that context because of the progress that is being made. thank you. >> patrick mu nlt shawl followed by rosy gozauly, dens persell, [inaudible] >> good afternoon chair and
7:09 pm
directors. patrick mu net shah. the evaluation report noted 2900 daily shuttle stop events and noted 2.7 percent of those blocked muni buses daily. the secondary analysis i submitted for todays public hearing calculates that translate tooz 80 buses blocked daily and [inaudible] 21 thousand,000 blocked muni buses assuming 269 work days annually. the report also notes of the 2900 stops 2 percent block cross walk squz views of passengers. that is 60 daily analyzing to 16,000. mta reports 35 percent the 2900 daily stropped block travel and bike lanes that translated to 1042 daily
7:10 pm
annualizing to a staggering 280,000 blocked travel lane and bike lanes. an alarming number impacting the city and ped estren and bike safety. 417, planning department second eirr exemption projection increases proves to be accurate. please vote against making the commuter program permanent. the secondary analysis reveals the wild west sechuation will simply continue. my analysis-the mta analysis claimed there were zero blocked buses at van ness and california street which is nonsense. the photo's on 9 and
7:11 pm
10 thou. show. >> rosy gozauly, den ispersell, [inaudible] derek slater. >> hi again, rosy gozauly here. i wrote down things. i don't have facts and figures i'm just a humble san francisco resident. where would never speak against people having employment where they haven't had it before. i would never speak against anything that would help the-our environment, but what i have to say is we have catering to the tech industry. i lived in the city now since 1968. there are more what i used to call rock and roll tour buses. these are the size of the google buses now. they used to
7:12 pm
go to the concert hall jz leave the city. now that size bus is in all our neighborhoods and for anybody to say that the presence of these buses, they don't just come unrided, they come with the workers who choose to live here and we all know what type of incomes they make and it isn't minimum wage. for anybody to say that those buses don't represent-not just represent the and play a part in what is happening to the sate as far as housing goes is lewd chris and i know you know this. i will finish with saying the face the city is changing as we speak and people are leave thg city. we know who is leaving and know who is coming and i
7:13 pm
just say, think. >> den ns persell, irish [inaudible] derek slater followed by james driscoll >> good afternoon. my name is den ispersell and live the south west corner of hate rr and diverse dareo for 36 year jz the time i lived in san francisco i have seen mta and its predsiser agency spend millions of dollars electrifying various bus lines and getting hybrid buses to reduce emissions from diesel fuel in san francisco. i think it was a wonderful choice and very much appreciated by many people. in a sense that is being undone when you have have bus after bus
7:14 pm
outside your window spewing diesel few. i appreciate the efforts of staff to do a turn over, role over, a new bus every 8 years , i don't think that is enough. i think the is a wonderful opportunity for mta through the board and staff to do something much more technologically advanced. we have easy access to a lot of very very small people. companies that are leaders in their industries. shouldn't mta think about what the future will look like. ? what will it lock like in 5 or 10 years? how will you have a commuter bus program that is environmental friendly and what can you do to reach out to the bus operator jz the companies on the peninsula that benefit in order to actually develop a
7:15 pm
program that is functional and a benefit for the satey of san francisco but the bay area as a region as a whole y. urge you to get out of the box of just thinking about the program and what happens next. >> irish bibwits, wny sul vony, derek slater, james driscoll and susan barack. brock, >> i livered in the mission for 40 years riding muni every day. i want to disagree with scott wiener that there are multiple studies of no fault evictions of seniors and people with disabilities within 4 blocks. [inaudible] as a nurse i'm worried about the hazard effects and
7:16 pm
ped safety. on 18th street by mission high there is muni number 33 and the commuter shuttles are sharing a stop and sharing is a euphemism. muni has to have stop in the middle the street. the student have to go out in the middle of the street and this is also the 33 which is a perfect example of the other side the income gap especially the 33 line on potrero that mta is still plan ing to cut. these are mostly people seniors and people with disabilities going san francisco general that for whom it would be a great hazard and hardship for them to transfer on number 9 to go to the hospital to the doctors appointments. i talked to people who have not gone to the doctors appointment because they
7:17 pm
are fearful the commuter shuttle. the visibility is difficult, people in wheelchairs that feel the visibility the drivers of the buses is poor and they feel they are too at risk and some people it effected their health care. the people who take the commuter shuttles, they have the luxury getting on one bus and going close to their homes to their work place. we would like people who ride money and the 33 to have the same. [inaudible] alex pauns daily on >> good afternoon members the board and chairman. we support the program and appreciate staff worked closely and heard our concerns. we are one
7:18 pm
of those community shuttles that serve a lot of people not just a select group and so we really do appreciate. the other thing that we are appreciative of is the conversations that this pilot has opened for all of us. we all started kine of doing the best we could either in the case of mission bay, we were told by the city we had to run a shuttle so it is nice we have a opportunity and there is a mechanism to work cooperatively and try to figure these things out. as we know, there isn't enough space to offer convenient service and that is the challenge this program offers a opportunity to do something about. moving forward we excited to work with the staff in a more collaborative fashion. >> derek slater, james
7:19 pm
driscoll, susan brock, alex [inaudible] >> thank you for having me. derek slater. i have been a rez sident here about 10 years and a google employee. living here is something i want to do since i was a kid. i grew up in north california and the same people i live down the street from today live down the street from me. they are not in tech, they work in restaurants and public school teachers and happy about the community we help formed and becoming a part the community we already have here. the challenges people talk about are serious and complex and have a role to play in addressing them. i was volunteering down the street at the rosa park senior center, there are many ways to
7:20 pm
to [inaudible] let's keep the shuttles and take those challenges head on. thank you. >> next speaker. >> james driscoll, susan brock [inaudible] bob mason. >> good afternoon. i have been a san francisco resident for 6 years and shuttle rider 5 years. i [inaudible] i do ride the shuttle sometimes as well. 2 things i want to say is first the shuttle exists because there were a group of employees that lives in san francisco around 2007 and commuted to [inaudible] the company supported what they were doing. it was initiated by community members and members that worked with the same company and car
7:21 pm
pooled together. google saw they were doing this and support #d them because it took people off the road and got people safely to and from work so it is important to note this started as a grassroots efforts. the other thing is i was lucky to work the city of san francisco on a project that matched my company with city department to try to handle or address issues nat we were experiencing together. a surge in 911 calls. it was a example of members the community working with the city government even though i'm not a city government employee, i care about the community and wanted to give back. when quhee have the opportunities to work together to pair companies and non profit jz city departments together to solve common problems we face it is a great opportunity to address issues in san francisco but also show the rest the country key with work together and we are people and not just part of a
7:22 pm
company or part of a city or government but we all live together and care about the same issues so they think for it time today. >> susan brock [inaudible] bob mason, luke swarts >> hi there. i have notes here so i'll try to go through what i have. i'm a long time san francisco residents and live on a small stretch of hate rr street between sonic and stanian. i do not think that the pilot should be finalized at this time, i think there are lot of problems that are not ironed out yet. i observe a lot of drivers ignoring the rule jz stop where they are not suppose today and and spoken with drivers and they laugh it off. the enforcement that citizens are supposed to use doesn't work. the license numbers you can't see them. a lot of times i see the rules
7:23 pm
vilailted and i'm on a muni bus and so the enforcement hasn't worked. i think the data isn't accurate because of that. also our little treats are not built for the huge buses. i have seen a lot more damage to the surface of the roads . there are too many shuttles and too many stops. i don't think anyone needs door to door service. i think people can walk or take muni to a larger shuttle area. definitely there needs to be a environmental review, that is a big problem. i think we need to limit the number of shuttle squz i think-i think i have too many notes here. i think the-basically i don't think we can finalize it now and need more data
7:24 pm
and environmental review, there should be air quality stutdies and impact on streets and studies of impact of eviction and displacement. we need placards on all 4 sides the bus and limit the number of buses. the companies should mitigate the damages done to the city. thank you. >> alex [inaudible] bob mason, luke swarts, amie white. >> thank you. alex [inaudible] google employee but here represented myself and family. i lived in san francisco for a decade. my wife is a public school teacher. my daughter [inaudible] was born at kaiser hospital on geary and my son tom oswas born on geary and live in inner
7:25 pm
richmond. i worked at google for a little over a year and a half and take the shet al each and every day. before google i was lucky to work in intell. a fine corporate citizen but didn't have shuttles so i calculated i drove 18 thousand miles in one year. my most recent year at google i took my car less than 10 times. i took the shuttle nearly every day. the shuttle is very important for my family and i. i walk about a mile to the shuttle stop and a mile on the way back so it is not necessarily door to door but it makes it possible for my family to stay here and not relocate and possible for my children to grow up where they were born and makes it possible to my wife to continue to be a public school teacher. lastly my family and i lived here for a decade and love need
7:26 pm
and ride muni quite a bit. we we take the 38 r, 38 and 38 b express regularly and with that i think the pilot has shown that these buserize good for the environment, kbood for families and working families and can coexist with muni so please make the pilot permanent. >> [inaudible] herbert wineer. >> good afternoon. my name is [inaudible] i am a 20 year resident of san francisco and i currently live at chunch and 15th in front of a stop. in that space my biggest concern is the incredible noise that is every day for me now since some point in last december. it is ridiculous. eerfben though church may be considered
7:27 pm
a arterial it is still a small arterial. it is still very tight, there are [inaudible] the 4 parking spots in flouchbt buildings are reserve frd the shuttles. they never use them, they-they use them but still block a travel lane. every day i see them pushing cars into had muni and taxi lane only and the muni lane has j trains coming up and down all the time. i think this is a issue. i aums don't understand why there is a stop in front of our building when just athround corner in front of safe way at a wider less traveled sidewalk there is space for them where they won't be leaking their exhaust into my home every day. it is a smaller building, it isn't something that is like 15 foot
7:28 pm
ground floor. we dont have double pained windows. really, i used to actually-work in mountain view and took muni and cal train every day and it worked and last-i dont know why these shuttles are not going the transbay station like every other lawn distance bay wide system does and hopefully you guys will think about that and especially i am tired of breathing in [inaudible] thank you. >> bob mason, luke swarts, amy wise, herbert wineer, eric willians >> bob macegen native san franciscan and live in the alamo square and on the board of directors alamo square neighborhood association. we generally support the program we have 4 areas of concern we would like the board
7:29 pm
to address. number 1 our concern is the proposal as framed causes concern about the loss of the neighborhood character of our neighborhood. fulton street is lest y listed by a mainarterial street and not sure why thrrks is one lane east sknound west down that is similar to other streets that isn't listed as a major arterial streets so having a hard time with the definition how some streets qualify and some don't. we don't want smaller buses to be able to use non arterial streets because we have the same concern about safety with passengers entering and existing buses. that is a concern with the smaller bus. the second concern is about the completeness and accuratey of the study. it doesn't appear all
7:30 pm
124 stops were looked at so a concern about the validity of the numbers that appeared in the study that is presented to the board and have questions whether those results would hold up if more stops were part the study. outreach needs to be better. we appreciate the open house and efforts but we would like to meet more regularly with staff. we met for residential permit parking [inaudible] finally we would like one improvement to the program that you not add additional computer stops over the 124 that are under consideration. >> luke swarts, amie wise, herbt wineer, eric williams, [inaudible]
7:31 pm
luke swarts, san francisco native home owner and military veteran and take a shuttle to work which allows me and my wife to live without a car. if not for the program i would have to buy and store a car and drive to work. i encourage you to approve the program with one improvalment, make my employer pay more. san francisco needs funding for public transit. the sf 2030 task force identified a [inaudible] last years prop a covers 500 million. not every shuttle provider can pay larger fees and should be fee for non profit and educational institution but tech daemps like my employer are able to & hapty to pay more. we were told prop 216 requires voters
7:32 pm
[inaudible] it states it apply tooz property fees nolt use fees. it seems the city attorneys interpretation may be lawyers being overly cautious. san francisco transportation system is more important that protecting the city against lawsuit and if the lawyers are correct go to the the voters. i gladly vote fortuse pay our fair share. i also urge you to study and propose a system for raising permit fee tooz benefit public translt. >> amy wise, herbert wineer, eric williams, senthious cruise, >> amy wise and i am a 3 [inaudible] candidate that goat over 7 thousand votes recently so representative to
7:33 pm
some extent. i urge you to not be too content with accepting too little in the process. we do need to better evolve disruption and i love tech workers because i consider myself part of that to a excitant because i work with technology and want to evolve the disruption. how many here have gone to save muni.org? they have a point by point case about why we need a eir and would like you to go through that today during the deliberation process. number tworks the housing impact, we know that coupeer tino will add about 20 thousand jobs over the next 5 years but they are required to build 1 thousand new housing units, if you don'ts think that will impact the housing crunch i would like to challenge you to a debate. anyone in the room when would like to be
7:34 pm
a part of a public debate about how housing should be included i'm game. why is mountain view ahead of san francisco? we are supposed to be the invasion capital. why does mountain view have a better program to shape the corporate interest? we need transit equity. can you discuss that with deliberations today about mountain views program, i think it is called mv go and google put a free shuttle chblt we can do better than what is offered. democracy is the only avenue to shape power. it is up to you, you are representing the people today. >> herbert wineer, eric williams,
7:35 pm
cynthia cruise, theresa >> herbert wineer. i do own google stock, however, i am against the invasion of these overgrown mechanical hippopotamus buses. they have really disrupted the neighborhoods, they are burying the history and culture the neighborhood and turning the city into a industrial park and it is a bad science fiction movie. what is happening is that the drivers of the buses are exploited. i think they deserve a break but so do the neighborhoods. they are underrepresented. now, i would propose a joint committee of google and the other tech companies who are hiding in the shadows. we don't see any the representatives here which they should be. also, the drivers, mta,
7:36 pm
and also the neighborhood residence, they should be present at these meetings. they should also we should have a joint committee so we can have a deesen compromise and don't implement anything until this happens. this is real democracy and top down decision that is being made and it will have a terrible impact on the neighborhoods. to see the buses go through narrow streets is a nightmare and it will get worse and don't think the tech companies have given anything bat to the sit a and they owe us so let's have a joint committee and set up it up and don't implement anything until is decision comes out of the committee. thank you. >> eric williams, [inaudible] >> good afternoon commissioners. i want to say thank you all for
7:37 pm
the saturday evening recognizing safe drivers transit operates where my union local 250 a operating for 15 years or more accident fee. they appreciate it and know you care because we do a hard job every day day and night. the commuter program, i think it is a done deal no matter what we say in here. bought and paid for, google whoench. in doing this report nobody contacted my office as a stake holder. did anyone from this young mans team get on a bus and drive down is a street a at rush hour? no. you get on our buses on the 24 line in rush hour. you get on the 49, the 47, coming down van ness at rush hour you see the real
7:38 pm
impact. it is a impact out there whether you believe it or not but it is a done deal, we know it. we will say with one of the few stops i have seen for the shuttle buses at market and van ness i think that works the best. they cannot-if you asking to share bus zonewise the sfmta it won't work. now they are subdued because they know everybody is watching. don't go in the zone because we are trying to get this passed. when this is passed you will see buses lined up and we will tell our workers to get in the traffic and stay behind it because we won't compromise our lifestyles to letting a disabled person off the street and get hit.
7:39 pm
please, just look at it. thank you. >> sintia cruse, theresa [inaudible] luvonia [inaudible] >> good afternoon. 10 months ago the league of pised off voters [inaudible] and submitted a bunch of request we thought were reasonable and all were ignoreed and so we would like to weigh in with a few more items most are repeat. the pilot should be continued until the sfmta gets the necessary data to create a permanent program. air quality impacts need to be studied. if the bike network of san francisco needs a eir, why doesn't a new transportation network? impacts to muni and city
7:40 pm
streets should be studied and impacts calculated as part the permit fee. this is a way around the state laws and it is reasonable. a nexus study should be done to determine the impact on eviction of displacement. commuter buses should be prohibited to narrow and [inaudible] please do not forget vision zeery. the number of daily stops increased by 29 percent since implementing the pilot, some activy of doubling or tripling shuttle activ taech. the reports number on the shuttle impacts to muni are skewed. i want to go back to the impact to our streets, do you know how heavy
7:41 pm
these buses are? can you guess how much more damaging the large tech buses are to the streets? dpw says it causes 4700 time the damage to the pavement than a regular vehicle. please consider these items. >> [inaudible] michael spaulding >> good afternoon theresa flandric and would like to see-first let me sayia gree with absolutely this last woman stated here soiowon't go into all that. i koothink the pilot program should continue and think it is too presmurture and think there are issues with displacement and displacing the muni buses. when i have to get off a quarter of a block further because there was a yahoo shuttle in the muni stop and dh thdriver said that
7:42 pm
guy is there every day. in terms of indata you have i'm not sure it is enough. not enough to go forward. the pilot program should continue. i will also tell i sent a let toor the board this morning it was forwarding a letter that a man that worked at intell for 30 years while he lived here having retired 5 years ago. there were 47 wurbers who lived in san francisco out of the 750 at the time at intell. 47 workers had used their own cars and had shared-there were 4 people per car. there were others who tried to live in san francisco but had moved back down to silicon valley. we in san francisco should not have to compromise our
7:43 pm
streets, the safety of our seniors and those with disabilities. i think the best idea is if there are shuttles they should fwee located at a place near the cal train station or transbay and then people can use because they tend to be the younger tech people who use the shuttles, we have wonderful bike paths now. take the bike to the transbay or cal train station and have the shuttles there. we will not have our streets destroyed and the neighborhoods >> fran taylor, i understand this idea of having hubs that some people mentioned was considered and rejected because the idea was that these riders needed a one seat ride. at the
7:44 pm
same time several people have mentioned earlier, disabled people trying to get to san francisco general hospital are being asked to transfer off the 33 to the 9 when this is rerouted as proposed. now , i don't like >> student stereotype but the commuter riders are young and able bodies and the riders to the general hospital are poor and dealing with difficult lives. the position of these 2 proposals sends a vile message that is more important to coddle a class that already has every imaninable iminty at work and makes a lot more money than most in san francisco, that this is more important than making life a little less difficult for people who are already dealing with constant struggle
7:45 pm
and many obstacles in their lives and this isn't the san francisco and want to identify with. one last thing, you have a stop number 35 at alabama and cesar chavez, there is no muni bus stop so it calls into question the accuracy. >> [calling names] if there are people in the ovover flow room there are seats available up here so speakers who want to come up stairs do so, >> my name is [inaudible] i ride the shuttle to work every day and i i come from [inaudible] if i didvent a shuttle to go to work i would buy a car and try to car pool as much as i can. i think
7:46 pm
hearing the comments today everyone agrees more car thonz kreets isn't good for the environment or safety, but i also hear that there is clear improvements in the program. i also here it isn't enough, so i suggest-i encourage you to consider making my employer and others that use the shuttle accountable for improvements. [inaudible] companies there should be a [inaudible] improving the program more. i don't think limiting the shuttles is a practical solution to the real problem. >> luvonia [inaudible] michael spoding, spike con, tony [inaudible] >> good afternoon. thaupg for the opportunity to speak. my name is [inaudible] i'm a lawyer and i use the shuttle and support the
7:47 pm
program. to be candid, i love san francisco and think of myself as a san francisco citizen first and formost and what is happening in the city is something that is really troubling for me. i think that many who work in tech often times you have a binary description of tech workers as not being citizens or feeling invested in the future the bay area of san francisco and don't think that is true. i think as many people said today, more regulation is important and think the tech companies should be held accountable. every from [inaudible] streets, traffic generally delays for muni. i think all these things should be analyzed. one thing that i thought originally is i agreed that the buses are too big mpt coming here and reading the report and thought smaller shuttles should be investigated. for me i think
7:48 pm
the pilot program is important for the environmental reasons. the idea of throwing that many cars and maybe not everyone would buy a car but would see a increase in parking issues like now it is already a issue and traffic as well, so for me i think that is important but i do think this needs to be a ongoing conversation with tech company squz citizens and hope this isn't the end. it sound like it will be [inaudible] one thing i want to emphasize is i think the labor harmony provisions are important. i dont think any of my friends or cowurbers would support the idea that people are not make agliving wage. i don't want to take up too much time [inaudible] i do think the shuttles have a impact but think it is larger than just the shuttles so hopefully we look at housing prauls policy as well.
7:49 pm
>> [calling names] >> hello. my name is michael spaulding and ride the commuter shuttle every day. i live in san francisco qu work in the south bay and i really love live ing in the city and encourage you to or support the pilot program continuing because it enables me to live in the community that i made with my neighbor jz friends and people here and enables me to participate more fully because the alternative is get a car and drive to south bay and as it is i can work on the shuttles which allows me to be productive. if i were driving i can't do that and have to spend more time at the office and less time in the sit a with the community. i'm also a
7:50 pm
avid cyclist and member the san francisco bike coalition so i appreciate the concerns you have shown for bike and ped safety and would encourage you to continue to push on those ishuses. i have been blocked with muni and commuter shuttles and see people idling on a regular basis so there is more work to be done but think the shuttleerize a necessary part of my commute and a lot of my friends commute said i think they should be regulated and think this is a good first step. more work to be done but appreciate the level of thought that has gone fl to the program. >> spike con, tony robeilous, jed holtsman. [inaudible] >> are any of those folk here?
7:51 pm
>> is mr. con here? >> my name is jed holtsman. i moved to san francisco in 1999 and have ridden muni all most every day sense. i want to have you pay attention to humany people here in favor for finalizing the program now are not directly helped by the shuttles as employees or the drivers apiring union. it uzyood to be worse isn't a acceptable argument for a city agency or endorsement for makes this first stab at raining in the wild west. i don't think we should be held hostage in the city transportation planning by a few people who insist on living 45 miles away from the jobs. we heard there are 2978 stauts a
7:52 pm
day and [inaudible] that is 2.85 residence per stop evonet. you are picking up less than 3 penal per stop event and that is what we are taking this time energy and money to do elwith. you also talk about approving the project without the fee being [inaudible] you also talk approving the project without environmental review. i'm a environmental policy special est. the buses emiltmit [inaudible] go counter to what the bay area quality management is doing, the department of environment, [inaudible] when we talk blet the infrastructure emments it away parking. i'm in favor of taking iowa parking for muni buses. fewer people take these shuttles than removing cars so building extra wide spots for the shuttle buses goes to a more
7:53 pm
special interest group than kwrust car owners which is already a special interest groups. there are 8500 uses of the use [inaudible] and that you look that disproportioninate impact and expendsures and benefits that are gibbon to this one percent of our city residence. thank you. >> is spike con in the audience? no. tony robels? fallowed by tess wellborn, adrienne covert, emily [inaudible] >> good afternoon. my name is tony robeilous and i'm with organization called senior and disability action and worked with mta and many groups to get the free muni for seniors and people with disabilities, something the organization is proud of. the
7:54 pm
shuttles are the bohemth symbol of eviction and displacement in san francisco that we see that is the-hit seniors particularly hard. we have very deep concerns about the environmental impacts on safety for seniors. i know seniors personally that have gotten into very close calls with the tech bus shuttles. there was a idea about having a hub where folks can bicycle to the hud and take their shuttle to work without having the buses clog the city streets and think that is a step in the right direction. i think this bending over backwards mentality and the coddling as one person put it, just shows to me that this especially
7:55 pm
interest group that has real a been catered to the do the extent where it is exclusive of the rest of us and it causes a lot of resentiment with the people we serve. i would urge you to not finalize the program and look at all of the ramifications of safety and otherwise that this all entails. >> [calling names]. if there are plebs of the public who wish to address the board who are still down stairs if you please come up stairs. >> good afternoon commissioners. tess well born and i aegree with what the last 2 speakers said and many
7:56 pm
others. i am a frequent muni rider and bike and car rider. we need more data and eir. this is a full bus company and i think calling it is a shuttle helps elide over some of the issues that are raised by many of the members the san francisco community. arguing these commuters are san francisco residence ignores that many of them moved here because of the shuttle service and it is not a shutting, it is a bus company. we need to as san francisco you can say our job is only transportation but you need to be advocating that the city work with other cities on the peninsula to put in housing for work forces . you need to advocate that the fees should be increased in sacramento. if you reposition this as a bus
7:57 pm
company that may change your options but also heard speakers say you can increase the fee substantially. we need dopos not all san francisco. a shuttle goes to ucsf to mission bay. a bus company that goes down the peninsula for 45 minutes to a hour after cruising all over san francisco is something else another together ft put this off, get more data, study the hub options and look at fees and repositioning housing. >> adrienne covert, emily alpart, michael smithwick, [inaudible] >> good afternoon. i'm with the bay area council and want to
7:58 pm
express support. there was virtually nothing known about the system. the sfmta rightly went out and developed the pilot program to gather data over the course of over a year you have gathered data and just heard a lot about it. we didn't know how many people road the shuttle squz how many cars came off the roads and how many conflicts with muni, now we vaclear idea and the numbers are powerful. 2 million car trips epreliminated from the roads [inaudible] 47 percent of riders don't own cars, half say they don't own it for the main reason being the bus commute. these are powerful figures and think the permit program put forward helps build on that success and takes us in the right direction. i think the bay area council is proud to
7:59 pm
have played a small role in priding some of the information sfmta need today put forward a pilot praposal and execute and deliver a common sense approach to rigulating the buses and think it will benefit the pedestrians and traffic and air and we hope that you will support this as well. >> emily alpart, michael smithwick, merea ingroom, cory cameron, matte [inaudible] >> good afternoon. i live in the castro and i was born in oakland and grew up in berkeley and my chief aspiration was to live in san francisco. i am living the dream. i also happen to take the shuttle. i love living in san francisco and also happen not to own a car. i don't want to own a car. i am part the community and knemy neighbors and
8:00 pm
volunteer on the weekends, i vote and here to stay. i urge you to continue to allow people like me to get to work in a environmentally safe way. thank you. >> [calling names] >> good afternoon commissioners. michael smith. i lived in the lower hate rr since 1980 and for those 35 years i noferb owned a week and ride muni every day mpt i walk a lot. i fully support the shuttle program as proposed. i have never experienced a conflict between the shuttles and muni at the stops. it doesn't mean it doesn't happen but i never experienced it. i-the buses i ride are crowded and i shutter to think if the
8:01 pm
shuttles didn't exist because i assume the people would squeeze on the bus i try to squeeze on. i believe they do a good job of reducing car use and congestion and pollution so encourage you to approve the proposal. >> [calling names] >> good afternoon. my name is mera ingroom and resident of san francisco and ask you to please not approve this or if you do approve it, please disallow the shuttles to continue stopping in muni spaces. there is a whole time of the day where i'm not able to get out anymore in the mornings when people go to work because there are shuttle buses blocking the muni stons and i have been cut off
8:02 pm
several times. to give you a concrete example, i went to polk and bush and there was a line oof people lined up and i asked what they were lined up for because there were never penal there before and they said they were lined up for the shuttle which had never stopped there before. i road my wheelchair up here to the next stop that did not have a a sfmta shuttle program sign on it and as soon as i got up there a shuttle bus came and stopped up there, so i called 311 and when i called to complain the operator at 311 angrily told me they were legal shuttle stops and i didn't have anything to complain about. if you guys pass this and still allow shuttles to stop in bus zobes
8:03 pm
zones you are telling seniors and people with disabilities in san francisco they matter less than a select few people who work at a select few companies on the peninsula. thank you. >> [calling names] if there are other people who wish to address the board who have not turned in a speaker card yet please do so. we have a few left >> cory cameron and also ride the shuttle program down to the silicon valley area. i'm grateful the for the program and appreciate the work you center done to look at safety and environmental impacts thmpt shuttle program allows me to do what i love every day and also allows me to live in the city that i love i i volunteer and
8:04 pm
vote and love living and thing it is important that we have this option. i would have to drive if i didn't have this available. it has a great environmental impact and encourage you guys to continue this program. i think it is incredibly useful and it allows me to be a contributing member of san francisco and here to stay and would live here no matter what so i appreciate this program. >> [calling names] >> hi. i work for google and expressing my opinion haven't been told to say. i lived in san francisco for 5 years and geary and larkin now and live in a big city and walk about 3 quarters of a mile. other times i ride my bike to cal train. the train isn't that bad
8:05 pm
[inaudible] before i lived here i lived in santa cruse 4 years and [inaudible] i wanted to move here since i was a teenager and glad i live here. if you ban buses from the roads i would ride my bike to the rain train. i probably woulden buy a car. that's it. >> [calling names] >> good afternoon. i addressed you on january the 21, twen 14 and requested there be placards placed on all 4 sides of the buses that are large enough. the reason is you can see any of the violators. your reports says there were 296 reported instances and
8:06 pm
69 from noy valley. there are 2 months missing so in the letter i sonet to the board i listed all the august and september violations not calculated in the plan. 26 and noy, if you do due diligence go to 26 and noy tomorrow and stand between 7:30 and 8:30 and see the damage done oo 26 street let alone the congestion at 26 and noy. what you are approving is the cunl sumption of over 1 million gallons of fuel used. that is what reverse maths does to your report. the regional freway express bus program you rejected. not saying there shoulden be a hub or
8:07 pm
spoke erangement. there needs review of that. i don't want to be talking to a bus provider, i want to talk to the prime contractor which is mta, so disregard the how is my driving. 311 is a mess, it took 3 minutes to do each number. the real number is sex thousand people in the large buses going to souths bay. you need to do reverse math and do the analysis on your report. the bay area council comes in the chan p transportation authority does analysis that got it to the paint where it is now. >> [calling names] >> good afternoon. my name is [inaudible] i am a community
8:08 pm
oreg nothings. the san francisco bike coalition studied the presented results urges the sfmta to include [inaudible] discourage shuttles uses bike network streets particularly streets part the vision zero network. require shuttles to have enhanced vehicle safety features similar to muni buses. require clear information on the vehicle for members to submit complaints that are easily accessible. increase the bike ways especially on streets that are known to have bike shuttle conflict particularly given the inroachment of travel in the bike lanesism finally require a mandatory uniform and transparent shuttle driver training program that focuses
8:09 pm
on ped and bike safety. similar to the ones that gogal and jenen tech rchb through our bike education program. thank you. >> trisha stauber followed by [inaudible] and bary flax. >> good afternoon everyone. thank you for being here today i appreciate this tonight for public comment. i live on ash berry and haze and right kiddie corner from john adams ccsf there are 6 thousand stud want that go there, on ash berry street between haze and growth there is a large diesel bus that idles there that uses it as a staging area every morning and goes on all day lodge until 10 at night. i urge you to not let the diesel buses to use side streets as a staging area. i also like
8:10 pm
to see a environmental impact report. i question how accurate the data can be if you don't have that done before hand. also about the data and riders, if question is that objective as well? if i lose my ride and shuttle would i not say i'll take a car? they would probably have to take public transportation like they did before or car pool. last but not least, i think having the shuttle busope toon the public would go a long way to creating good will on the part the companies that sponsor them. thank you so much for your time. >> [calling names] >> thank you for the opportunities. my name is [inaudible] been a resident in the bay area for 15 years. it is a dream to live here. i am intimidateed being on live tv. number 1,
8:11 pm
please remember the fact that the shuttles bring people of all sorts many who luchb the commune etay are in and serve the community. i'm one of those people and will remain one. the second is i think there is a lot that can be done to better utilize and regulate the shuttles. even riding in on them i see the mistakes they do and think there is a good need for better regulation and go ahead and charge more too. that is all, thank you. >> [calling names] last person is christian [inaudible] >> my name is jerry flax and i livered here since 1975 with the exception of spending 2 years in florida where i worked at dade transit. i'm opposed to
8:12 pm
the shuttle program for many many reasons. i would like to eco some reasons thrks lack of a proper placard that needs to be eluminated and larger so when there are infractions people can call and get the nrflgz across to 311. i also mr. opposed to size of the buses like a neighbor of mine who spoke earlier. i also live north of the pan handle and these huge buses going down haze street, grieve street, hadeer street, it is ridiculous. i also want to say there is a lot of talk about there wild west and don't think of you are doing anything about other corporations enterprises that are bringing their buses to muni
8:13 pm
stops and in particular the tour buses. they stop at hate street and every muni stop and nobody is doing anything about that. have we opened the door to this? somebody can bow standing at [inaudible] any time of the day and ish hew citation tooz the big bus, but it seematize is being allowed. i hope that that gets acknowledged and dealt with properly. i like to see a eir study done and also like further consideration for a hub. >> spike con, followed by christian [inaudible] those are the last 2 people who turned in a speaker card >> spike con and i lived here since 84 and i am 57 years old. i ride
8:14 pm
my bicycle everywhere. i really care about transportation and having it flow and to have private companies using public resources doesn't-that sh the problem. of course we support a shuttle service and like ucsf they should park in a parking lot on a private property as a hub where people go. they can have nice secure bike parking for those that can bike and for those that can't use muni, pay into the muni system and get more resources. as i said, i'm a bicyclist, who whos world do you put huge wide buses that take up more an a car space on lanes with bike lanes? vulensia street isn't the place to put a big white google bus. as everybody else said who lives in a neighborhood with small er streets that are created for cars, you dont
8:15 pm
have a big white google bus taking a right turn and blocking 4 laneotches traffic because the streets were not built for these big huge buses. why can't we stop your approval and i like the tdu guys i wonder if what we say it doesn't matter kw you [inaudible] that is the problem as a public commenter getting the opinion you herds. people have concerns, but will it be rubber stamped today or not? please think about this and use the concept of car pooling and shuttles and that is what we want to see but do it correctly and do a eir. how can you approve a program without have eir report and the nexus of what the buses are effecting the neighborhood and gend fiication. [inaudible] is the last person to turned in a speaker card and will be the last person to address you
8:16 pm
today >> thank you for hearing what i have to say. i hate public speaking so i'll make it quick. i'm a bike person and would like to second what the other bike people voiced. i find it very dangerous to share the road with these gigantic buses, it is down right frightening. i would like to see the pilot program continued and an eir. i also don't enjoy inhaling the fumes from the buses when i am good b hind them and i have seen buses on hate street parked idling for several minutes, so i support the continuation the pilot and an eir. thank you. >> seeing no one else we asked do you want to speak. this is the
8:17 pm
last time i will say this. >> thank to everyone who took off the-tim dawnally. the ideal situation is the tech workers to take cal train. maybe have shuttle buses take to the location of work, vecd to that perhaps they could park near the freeway and take muni like most do to the shutdal bus loading zone there. idelly you put a express bus in the morning so they get there in a hurry. on our street you have taken half the parking spaces for the shuttle buses. on throw different occasions and not one was there a notice of a hearing and assume that goes on everywhere so you don't follow the rules. that is the brown act, you should know that. also,
8:18 pm
according to the city attorney and police code you can't rent, sell or buy space at the curb so how are these people buy spaces that curb? if these people want to be part of the community i think taking muni is a good stef >> public hearing is over. did you want to say something? is there a problem turning in a card? okay, come on. >> thank you for the opportunity to come here. justin rien. i heard a lot of what others had to say on both sides. i am a cyclist and take transbay bus to emreville and commuted to mountain view on cal tran and know there are capacity problems a.
8:19 pm
better solution is like the transbay bus rather than the individual companies sending buses to the neighborhood and agree with everyone else that says that people should come on bus or bike or however else to central place like transbay terminal like i do and not expect door to door or neighborhood to neighborhood service. that's it. >> this is the last speaker. >> hello, my name is [inaudible] i live in san francisco since 1992. i work in the city, i don't own a car, i take muni and walk to work. i took a picture that i think somebody put it up earlier, the picture of a disibleed person using a wheelchair blocked by a shuttle at a frequently used stop across from the hall of justice. one thing i think is is i take the
8:20 pm
bus from 8th and market and there are several of these companies that use this stop like adobe and jinga even though there is a bus 83 x that goes there created for this tour bus and yet they each have their own individual buses and they don't collaborate on this. i see buses coming in at 10 at night that one or 2 people get off of. i think there is over kill in terms of the system and there should be more of a collaborative approach. i think a eir is a necessity and a great point earlier that the bike plan necessitated a eir and there is legal action and considering the legal action and think it is pre-mature to come to a conclusion about
8:21 pm
making this permanent at this time. i just want to urge caution and not finalize the plan at this point. i think more needs to be studied and i inyrj all of you to take muni all the time. you should get rid of your cars. thank you. >> that will conclude public questions >> a couple clarifying questions for staff, the report was very good and think people brought up valid questions that show there are a lot of strong feel squgz probably further refinement and work to be done. some of the ones that kind of have stood out to me are the idling, the stop locations, high injury network and contact info on the buses. do you believe these are problems we can continue to
8:22 pm
work towards addressing in the permanent program? as if we approve the program it isn't set in stone as nothing is at the mta, we'll continue to work to refine this >> yes, i do think all those things are things we plan to work on and get better about. idling is something that will be addressed with increased enforcement. i also think it is something that once we have the arterial network restriction in place, the large buses won't be allowed on the smaller residential streets for any reason whether to idle or drive so think that will go a long way. i also think that the increase more robust gps data will allow us to record when buses are in places where they shouldn't be. in terms of the stop locations
8:23 pm
and high injury network and dhainge to the the joan network, one thing i didn't note in the presentation is it a living network. over the course the pimet we changed or added or deleted over 40 stop locations that rin the network to respond to construction or muni for ward projects or input from the community so we are always open to move thing around when moving something makes more sense. i herds folks say why isn't the stop around the corner? we are open to listening to those thimgs and decide if there is a better location athround corner we are happy to look at that. there is one other. student>> better contact information on the buses professor>> we heard a lot about that. partly that is a issue with 311 because you can always call 311 that has a router system that sends the
8:24 pm
commuter shuttle complaint to me and others working on the program so if that isn't working well we'll improve that. we are including in the permanent program how is my driving sticker so people can contact the shuttle operators directly to say i saw you doing something you shouldn't do so think that will help. to the extent the people want to address it to us first we are happy to hear that student>> do you think it is realistic to put the placard that identifies the bus as part the commuter program? i think they are on the back of the buses now. is it realistic that we put them on the sides as well so people have a easier time seeing them? professor>> yes, they >> yes, they are on the back and fronts and can make them bigjure put them on the sides. >> those are my only questions >> i know it says in the report
8:25 pm
we are seeking to lower green house gas emissions from the shuttle kloo fleet but maybe setting more aggressive goals and targets is something we can do. what is the next step of passing this today and look at stops and make changes, can you talk about that looks like the next step if this were approved today in terms of things discussed like the signage and the hub situation offering hubs around the city. also the issue around fees. i know that there is a concern about there damage done to the streets and roads quh is separate and apart from the cost of enforcing the shuttle program and how can we look at that and what do we have for next steps looking at that? >> i think with regard to the signage we will have to replace all the signs because they all say pilot program on them so that is something that
8:26 pm
we'll keep in mind if we need to make them bigger or easier to see or look more like a street sign. the hub and spoke system as we have termed it, it was something that was considered as part the program and something we thought about before the pilot and as we talked about what to do after the pilot and think we view our role as striking a balance between what we acall the wild west and a hub and spoke system is on the other end of that and we think we have gone a long way something like a hub system with the arterial restrictions and consolidating the neltwork on 120 zones rather than stopping wherever a shultal wants >> student to stop. the hesitation
8:27 pm
with hub system is there are not any particular onstreet location that can accommodate the buses. the parking that would have to be away i don't think is acceptable. if we found a parking lot as a place for shuttles can gather, dozens or hundreds of buses trying to access a single spot at a time would cause traffic and air quality impacts we felt would be unacceptable to those that live or work near the hubs so that is why we won't toward the middle with arterial restrictions. with regards to the fee amount, we are still working on that. the pilot fee was set as a cost recovery. that was discloseed that we are limited by state law to recover the
8:28 pm
cost of administration and forcement. we want to recover all the cost that mta occurs as a part the fee so is something we'll look into but think that is in some ways more a legal issue. >> the green house gas target professor>> [inaudible] that was also we as mta and city don't have bower to regulate green house gases, thaset for the epa and state government and we are pr empive. what we can do is require newer vehicles so that is why we went that direction >> if i can follow up on some of the excellent questions. one thing i was curious about is in terms of the-you say it is a evolving process where [inaudible] i was wondering
8:29 pm
because i think a few people pointed out pedestrian safety concerns and the relocation and sure you looked at this from near side to far side improving the ped estren experience crossing. that is important thing and seems something simple we can do, i wonder if we do that soon or what the complications involved? >> i don't know the specifics of all the zones. i think a reason a lot of the zones are where they are is because they are shared with muby and we move a
8:30 pm
lot of zones near side to far side so that will take care of some of those and also just the information we learn td about how much better far zones are will influence how we change the network going forward. i think the main concern is that we would have to reallocate things that are park spaces so when you focus on a specific area you have folks that may not want that but it isn't something that means we caen make those changes >> can we focus on the high injury areas because i know we have good data this and wondfer we prioritize those to be looked at? i just have a question about one the public speakers made the point about [inaudible] it is a difficult with just everything else on the streets besides the
8:31 pm
shuttle. the bus to pull if thoo curb for a wheelchair to get off the bus so i wonder what the recourse for our bus drivers-does the bus need to be held up until the shuttle is [inaudible] what is our recourse as a agency because i think-it is a safety concern but a huge delay for the rest the passengers >> it is a important concern. i will say that part the program and policy document says shuttles have to yuld to muni and pull as far forward as possible to allow muni to get to the curb so we need better enforcement of that which i think we'll get with more enforcement officers. i think in some cases the muni drivers
8:32 pm
are-might be pulling into the travel lane and loadjug unloading there. that is a another thing that more focus on it talk with people and working with everybody involved tomake sure it is important that the muni bus access the curb. >> thank you. on that note, thank you for your hard work and realize you did a lot of outreach and work here and i think it is important to say that and don't want the questions to appear like we are only giving critical feedback. i was concerned to hear from the heads the largest uniyrn and the union of the operateers that he feels the drivers were not solicited on how this is working. was that statement correct and is there a plan to get there feedback of our drivers because i think they would be a very efficient representative othf muni driver jz i know we are trying to consider
8:33 pm
the interest of everybody's and one of the interests we are hearing is how the shuttle programs effect the people who ride within the city on the muni system and want to make sure be have a good voice for those people and it seems the muni drivers them selves and schedule times effected may be a good proxy >> as the pilot was developed and changed there was consultation with muni driver jz inspector squz transit service planning team around muni accessing the curb and as part the evaluation and the vetting of the zone network that we were proposing today to go permanent, we did talk to drivers and i myself went out and talked to folks on the 12 and 27 because they are impacted at vulensia and 25 and
8:34 pm
24 and cesar chavezism we had folks to talk to people on the 47 and 49. we said what is your experience with commuter shuttle and how aunch do they get in the way. we talked to them but didn't go through the union struckier and happy to go through that >> i think it is important to do this and cope doing thiand number 2, i think mr. williams deserves the respect to know this was done and the voices of the operators were not ignoreed and should goat get a summary of what is done and solicit his feedback as a important leader. if he comes down and says we didn't seek his input he deserves the respect of what we
8:35 pm
did. >> thank you chairman and thank you staff and everybody who works hards on this to get it as far as wehave come along this. i thank everyone for all your input regardless of whether you support or oppose. i think the city is under going transfomation it is challenging for so many of us. i have been here since the 70's and never been able toafford to buy. i am a lower income people that has a hard time affordsing to be here. that being said, i think that the issue of gentrification and affordable housing is important related to transportation but the issue we see with these shuttles or buses or wlaurfb you want to call them, i feel is a symptom and this particular policy is not
8:36 pm
the place to deal with it. there is housing bonds we can work on, cap and trade funding that can go towards funding affordable housing and inclusionary requirement jz impact fees, any number of places to deal with this issue. speaking on the tech shuttle riders some that live in the building i live in, seeing them attack td and scapegoated is hard and apologize to the them for having to bear the brunts orphthat and applaud the courage they have spoken with here. who wanted want mr. [inaudible] to be their neighbor? these are wonderful folks i welcome to the community and speaks to san franciscos values if we want to talk about being inclusive as possible. recognizing this will require change and adaptation. every morning i am woken up by the [inaudible]
8:37 pm
rumableing past my building. they don't stop going until wrun a.m. the apartment next to me took out my sunlight because they added another floor. this is a growing city and changing economy and need to work together to get to where we need to be. we got a letter from cal train saying they caechbt accommodate tee many more folks without eelectrification which is a long time coming and they support this program. recognizing this isn't the thofend line, this is something i feel we'll be able to address and accommodate and continue to get input from folks on not just how to tweak it but how we are succeeding. it was a couple meetings ago people saying they are dependent on paratransit saying it takes 2 hours to
8:38 pm
get across town and one way to get people out of cars is providing them with real alternatives. if we get away from the fossil fuel dependency that sends people to their deaths ipwar squz acts of terror we need to give people alternatives and this is one of those things. i also recognize the tech industry is trying their best. if it wasn't for the tech industry i don't know if we would have free muni for [inaudible] that being said there is a lot of room for improvement. i regularly ride by bike up hate rr street and been passed several times by the lumbering giant and thereat
8:39 pm
is real and hope we'll improve them. one thing i'll ask the staff is ixue of enforcement. i think we do-when they make violation they should be held accountable and they think thiwill. i think they want to be good neighbor jz partners and but we need to hold them accountable. if we had more money for enforcement from the revenue jz fees would we be able to get more than the pity amount of violations we have been able to hold them accountable to so far? >> i think the more enforcement officers the more [inaudible] >> so that >> yes and thereat is part the plan. enforcement office rbs will push the fee up as a ongoing program. >> recognizing this is very much a work in progress that woe got still
8:40 pm
a long way it go and have compl a long way, i will support the program. move it forward. i feel like that i'm deeply grateful for the labor piece part. this is a growing economy and everyone needs a piece of it and the labor piece is something i'm supportive of so will support this going forward. >> two or three things, someone mention thd idea of cooperation among the providers, is that realistic? is there a attempt to do that with google and microsoft? >> i can't speak too much towards what the companies want to do. i know some of that has taken place. there is a company called [inaudible] that is what they do, they coordinate smaller companies who probably can't afford their own shuttles to all get on one bus. some of that is happening
8:41 pm
and think more will happen in the future. >> i think it should. somebody mentioned the standsered of training for drivers, assume once you are on the free way and in the peninsula, drivering in the city with the bicyclist and seniors and persons with disabilities and students walking recollect , that is matter, is there talk for standardized train frg the drivers cephal >> there is. the mta a couple month agoy reviewed a large vehicle training vehicle for drivers drivering on crowded city streets. all the drivers are required to take it. >> another point mentioned about is there one place that is easily accessible for people to make combnts the system proand con? >> i think 311 is always there
8:42 pm
and directs commuter shuttle related comments directly to our team. if there are things we can do to make it more obvious how to submit your comments or gets directed to the right place we would love to do that because we want all the input we can get >> i support that and think the board ought to hear about it too. the final thing is i understand the cost issue is discussed in the next years up and coming budget, the fees and fines, is that right? >> at the latest next years budget givethen program started in february i hope that we might be able to bring something sooner for fee adjustment but a change in fee is approved by the board, so you will have a opportunity when we bring a new fee that
8:43 pm
incorporate the cost for input at the time >> it is brought forward in january then? >> i don't know the plan timing but hope it is before the next budget cycle >> that is my hope too. i think we will do everything we can do get it to you as soon as possible. the worst case scenario is keep the fee as is now and when we do the budget we can incorporate all the cost that were not covered by the fee for those first few month jz make sure they are paid through had fee going forward >> several made about the damage to had large vehicles are doing the streets, could that be part the equation coming up with this? >> we haven't-in the short term it can't . in order to assess a fee based on the damage they are doing to the
8:44 pm
streets we have to doa comprehensive nexus study and don't believe we can assess that street just to one category or subcategory of vehicles. the city at some point 15 or twnts years ago impose adstreet damage fee thrown out by the courts and the city to to refund a bunch of money it assessed, so not sure sthra easy way to do that. not focusing just on these vehicles but it is something happy for us to explore further >> they are not alone harming streets. the vehicle construction around now is that part of what deals with them? >> we could as a city attempt to unter take the engineering study that is necessary to support the nexus mpt not sure to the extent we can do so in a differential way so may have to
8:45 pm
assess it against ourselves and all the cars and everybody else that drives in the city but it is something we can explore. >> members of the board >> i'm will toog support this and think we need to do the amendments first. >> directors before the first amendment is adopt a proposed amendment to the transportation code with the modifications i read into the record earlier in the day. >> all in favor say aye? >> next motion is amend the resolution in support sthof determination the program and transportation code amendment are exempt from environmental review. >> i guess i will say iant been on the planning commission, [inaudible] baseline conditions are the environmental toxins so it is hard to do a eir that shows different
8:46 pm
because the baseline is status quo. >> all in favor say aye. opposed. [inaudible] >> motion to approve >> discussion. all in favor say aye. [inaudible] thank you. take a short break here. to session. we'll wait for a moment for sfgtv who is catching up >> item 12 approve various parking traffic and parking modifications associate td with the wiggle neighborhood green corridor project. i won't read through all of those. >> any presentation? i guess we are. >> gootd afternoon. my name is mareium
8:47 pm
[inaudible] at sfmta and excited to talk about the wiggle green corridor. this is a joint project we worked with public works and pucf partnersism the wiggle is poornt connection in our bike network. if you are look the key route going east to west across the city it is a part of a critical connection between market street and man pan h handle [inaudible] it staarea favored by bicyclist because it is the flattest route between 2 hill squz the reason the puc is interested in the project area as it is flat area where storm water collects. the name wiggle comes because it is a zigzag route. the route is something bicyclist found over
8:48 pm
the past decades and we have over the years added improvements to make it safer to bike there and more visible. the wiggle today is not just the bicycle route but also a dense residential neighborhoods. it has local xhilsh district and really great transit and popular dog park so it is used by a lot of different people use thg wig today. the bike infrastructure itself [inaudible] at the intersections to help people find their way mpt for the most part it isn't something woe have major bike facilities like bike lanes and or a cycle track and will be a shared street for most the route. or project goals were in addition to the puc of reducing storm water going into the sigher system we want to
8:49 pm
improve conditions for people walking and biking. this includes making it safe for pedestrians cross thg streets, minimize congestion for mot r vehicles and make sure people that use the road way are going in a way that is slow and safe and that includes all road way use. our project timeline included outreach that started in 2013, virementdal revie last year and are in the design phase with construction to complete in 2017. our community outreach includesed 4 public community meetings where we had be2950 and 100 people in attenance at each. they were paired with surveys that included on line surveys and with some received over 500 submission. we had smaller meetings [inaudible] walking up and down scott street and attending
8:50 pm
the meetings of stakeholdser groups and had on going conversation with e-mail and public hearing. the set of elements focus on traffic diverter, ball bouts preferred by people in the outreach process as a way to improve visibility at intersections and people can be seen using the road way. cross walks which improve pedestrian visibility at those intersection squz your legislation action to approve [inaudible] >> we have a question about rain gardens. >> this is the puc's part the project because san francisco has a combined sewer system the water on the street
8:51 pm
level mixes with the sue squj if it overflows there is a bad situation so they are looking to improve and one piece is have more rain water absorbed into the ground water that includes add thg rain gardens that allow them to soak into the ground. this is a [inaudible] elements you can't see it that well on the screen and won't go fl into too great detail. those are primarily the bol bouts included in the project at 8 different locations a well as a few red zones [inaudible] in particular i want to draw your attention to the diverter which is a change at intersection of scott and [inaudible] we no longer permit southbround traffic on scott
8:52 pm
street or turning left on [inaudible] this is something of interest to residence along skeet street because they see a lot of automobile congestion. it is of the different streets that make thup wiggle this is the street with the highest vehicle volumes and by making the change we reduce the vehicle volumes something more comfortable for those riding bike squz walking on the streets and libing in the neighborhood. scott street has the longest segment of the bick network as well as other green connection network. at the intersection of scott and [inaudible] the design is a large bull bout on the south west side the street. it also eliminates potential collision which is for cars turns left from [inaudible] to scott where bicyclist wait to
8:53 pm
make their turn. we all a collision there this past prl due to that movement. because we will implement this diverter we want to make sure the traffic that is using scott street for southbound travel is accommodated thichb neighborhoods and not on residential streets. our proposal includes a lot of improvement tooz the deviz dareo cor door including timing the signals as well as eliminate a few left turn locations where we can reduce had delay due to piling up as well as we are proposing red zones on [inaudible] which will allow drivers [inaudible] outside of the travel lane. these improvements some sure traffic can seek out deviz dareo as a alturn toov ative
8:54 pm
>> >> student scott and keep divisadero proving and hopefully these will imprive that. there are key concerns we heard from the residence as we have gone dlou the project and want to address them for a few moment because we may hear about them during public comment. one is concern about the parking reduction due to implementation of the bull bout locations. sthis something throughout the project we are strategic where we propose bull bouts. we improve visibility with pud estrens to people riding the bikes and driving in the streets. these are also places where we may provide a opportunity for added greenery so thought those benefits were outweighed the fact [inaudible] that was consistent with
8:55 pm
the feed pm back we received throughout the public process. overall it is 2 percent of parking spaces within a one block radius of the corridor. aortconcern is about spill over traffic from traffic in scoot street. we'll make improvement said to divisadero and at the same time we have done dat saw dleckz clecz of where traffic is and continue to monitor that and if there are issues consider making adjustments. for residence of lower hate rr it is appreciation for the benefits of having reduced traffic on scott there are folks concerned about accessing their homes if they come by auto mobile. if you are a residents r rez dent of scott it is still a 2 way street, the diverter blocks fltrust from the south
8:56 pm
but if you come out your drive way you can exist to the south of the block. the way the bull bout is designed but it will prohibit normal vehicles from entering during normal use if it is a emergency vehicle and emergency situation the-there is enough space for a emergency vehicle. in a earlier proposal we included a left turn prohibition from divisadero from hate rr and heard if we block access from scott street having the left turn prohibited will make it difficult so we did additional analysis and moved that from our proposal based on resdant request. [inaudible] in the short term if we approve the measures today we have a new elements that can go
8:57 pm
in right away including the making the bike lane on [inaudible] we will do the diverse dareo turning and parking restrictions a elwith as add painted safety zones that bull bout locations that have the most potential to improve pud lestren safety. we will implement or traffic signal changes on devirs dareo so by the time we impt lment the constructed project in 2017 that traffic will be able to use divisadero. that's all i have for you today. happy to take any questions >> a quick question. could you explain around the arko station what are you recommended? >> so, you are probably familiar with the issueoffs the ark estation along [inaudible] this isn't related to that at all. it is related but arko station
8:58 pm
has a entrance on devirs dareo so northbound devirs dareo if you try to get to the arko station you will block the lane. there are a couple parking spaces that block someone from waiting in the parking zone. it is like creating a right turn pocket but it isn't a right turn pocket because it is [inaudible] it is on devirs dareo and not relateed to the challenges we have seen [inaudible] >> we have a representative from supervisor breeds offices. >> [inaudible] from supervisor breeds office. good afternoon >> good afternoon board of directors [inaudible] supervisor breed. i'm here to give supervisor breeds full support for the plans proposed for the
8:59 pm
igwithal neighborhood green corridor in district 5. supervisor breed feels the plan makes safety improvements for cyclist and addresses pedestrian safety and [inaudible] encouraging safe speed for users mptd she gives her support after years since 2013 of community meetings and input that include traffic diverters, raised cross walks and bull bouts and green landscaping and want to give a special thanks to sfmta staff for listening to neighborhood concerns regarding to keep the left turn light on divisadero and hate rr street. the wiggle is a key section of a important route that allows people to move through san francisco. supervisor breed want tooz make sure that route is safe and accessible to everyone. thank you. >> mr. chairman. hold on.
9:00 pm
have to get to the timer here, but i seem to be stuck here. cathy dulukea file by miles stepto and lawrence lee. >> mrs. duluke ahere? is miles stepto here followed by lawrence lee and morgan fits gibbons >> good afternoon, miles [inaudible] san francisco native member and inturn at san francisco bike coalition. i'm here to express bike coalition strong support of improvements as part the wiggle cor door project and urge the board to approve this project so construction can begin immediately. or as soon as possibly. [inaudible] for this project was held april 3
9:01 pm
the year which is a [inaudible] and major accident occurred 3 days prior on scott and fell between a car and 3 people on bikes. given that, we know the traffic diverter proposet supported by local neighborhood associations, san francisco bike coalition members and [inaudible] is more critical than ever. it is nearly 3 years since the first public meetings were held where the members pushed for improvements for biking and walking. it is time to make the changes real. the project brings green landscaping [inaudible] pedestrian visibility and a better biking experience for the paubural bike route if thousands of people ride every day. on behalf of our 10 thousand members we hope you approve the changes today to make san francisco a better city for bikes.
9:02 pm
>> [calling names]. the last person to turn in a speaker card is michael [inaudible] >> lawrence lee and serve on the board of lower hate rr association and strongly support this project. it addresses our neighborhood need for calm streets and increases pedestrian visibility and comfort for access crosses the streets and inyeass safety along the popular route for people bicycleing from other neighborhoods. we cu-mind the public outreach and includingmany meetings with us. not supposed to use the words innovation this year because it is overused but this includes good ideas and feedback from the community and
9:03 pm
proiorities that are important to the neighborhood. >> good afternoon. >> good evening. that is what you get for not looking at the agenda before you come. my name is morgan fits gibbons and district 7 [inaudible] representative for the pedestrian safety committee and run the group called the wig party cht i want to read a section the city charter, section 8 a.115. the third point, decisions regarding the use of limited public street and side walk space will encourage right of way by pedestrian and [inaudible] strive to reduce traffic and public helths and safety. the on thing i want to say is this project has taken too long to
9:04 pm
happen. not only did we have the collision in april where 3 people were injuryed, 20s 13 was the date the public meeting started. i introduced this idea in 2011, neal [inaudible] back me up on that. this was my idea. by the time it is in the ground it will be around 6 years from introduction to implementation, that is too long. this is one block. the pavement is awesome and will look great. i want to read names [inaudible] all these people are dead and killed on tower our streets and killed on streets in traffic violence, streets that were slated to be improved and the only reason they were not improved is this agency is too slow in getting the streets in the 21 est century. people are dying
9:05 pm
and neek to take a look in the mirror to see how to move from good yites idees to implementation. >> michael [inaudible] >> hi again. as you may recall i lived in the city fl 35 years and don't drive. specifically i lived for the last 26 years on scott street between oak and feld so the street with most the proposed changes including the diverter. i sit on the front porch a lot and watch the scene. it isn't uncommon to see drivers [inaudible] get uncomfortable and start to drive aggressively. honking and yelling and cursing and trying to run bicyclist out of the lane so fully support this. i'm thrilled it is finally coming forwards and participated in every public discussion, workshop you name
9:06 pm
it on this issue for the last 2 and a half year. i want to point out something you did that was in response that we shared and a pedestrian concern and the left turn from bikes from scott at oak out the wiggle to the park. that is currently a very dangerous intersection for pedestrians. as the pedestrian [inaudible] they are concerned being hit by cars coming down the hill so they are look frg the cars and not seeing the pedest rbs and 1ing them down. you are great by doing the side walk intention on the east side so peds have a safe crossing however my prediction is at this corner on the west side the nrbt section now that bikes don't have to be concerned getting hit i wonder how many will stop and yield to pedestrians so
9:07 pm
think you need to think about increased signage or a flashing sign or maybe a arm to drop down. we mentioned arko and have to share the side walk in frunlt fronts of the entrance to arko is blocked. they don't want to wait. there is a sign that says don't block bike lane and side walk that is ignoreed. i suggest stronger signage and maybe hashing the side walk so cars it is clear you are not supposed to be in this space. great project and thank you for crrg approval. it is a big improvement. >> thank you, i want to acknowledge mr. fits gibbons and thank him for the years he put towards this. morgan i know you are leechbing san francisco and california soon and say you really worked so hard to build community around the wiggle and move forward on projects like this and acnology your
9:08 pm
frustration with how slow it has been and hope when you come back to visit which you will that you see more projicts going in and look what we can do now and be proud of the city you are doing. good luck, your new city is glad to sl you. wish you all the best. >> all in favor say aye. thank you very much, >> aprouchb coordination agreement bike share program [inaudible] >> good afternoon. excited to be here to talk about a great opportunity to expand cycling in san francisco and that is the first public action the board can take to expand the bike share system. today we have the board to support the approval the coordination agreement for the bay area bike
9:09 pm
share program. this is one of two agreements necessarily frathe expansion from the 700 bike policy today to 7 thousand regional program. the first agreement is the coordination grument and that is the agreement among all the parties in the regional expansion thrks city of san francisco, oakland, emreville, [inaudible] the second agreement is between mtc and motivate and motivate will come up and tell more about their role in the program but it is just a coordination we are can asking the board to recommend action on today. again thrks expansion of bike share is moving from the publicly owned bike to a fully privately operated bike sharing system. no use of public funds. it is
9:10 pm
like the city bike system in new york but hopefully better. owned and operated by motivate and the sponsor will fund all the cost of the expansion. before we invite emily stalepten up i want to thank heath madx and the [inaudible] to what we are excited about which is a transformational expansion of cycling in san francisco through a privately funded and operated bike share system. with that i will turn it to emily stapletinal. >> good afternoon. >> thank you tom and chair nolgen members the board. i would like to walk through a little bit more detail of the bay area bicycle share program as it is today, what it will look like tomorrow over the term the contract, some the benefits of bike share for the bay area and also the process
9:11 pm
be which we solicit public feedback. so, the program to date has been operated under a partnership with the bay area air quality management district and live since 2013 and successful to date with over 7 thousand trips taken [inaudible] zeer ofatalities. so far the bike share program covered primarily soma and the financial district. sth innofent pimet is see the adoption of bike share and see the way it interacts with transit and we have seen it is a success and people incorporated bike share into their commune xhoouting patterns and use it as a first and last mile. the capacity st. much greater
9:12 pm
and what has precipitateed conversations to expand this in san francisco so it covers xhrjs and residential communities. where we are right now, we have a approved a term sheet as of may for the conditions under which motivate the company i work w for. we operate the expanded bike share system. the system grows from 700 bikes to 7 thousand bikes region wide which is a transformational implementation of the bike share program. you see a couple slides in that the bikes here in san francisco will number about 4500 bicycles which creates a lot of opportunity for additional riders to engage with active transportation that maybe allows them
9:13 pm
to subsitute bikes other than cars and single occupancy vehicles. the program is klirfbed with entirely no cost to taxpayers, through sponsorship funding and outside finances. motivate is excited to bring this to the bay area to allow this to happen quickly rather than incrementally over time. wrun thing we are proud of is as we site the stations 20 percent are located in communities of concern as desing naitded by the mtc and as i mentioned on the last slide i'll talk about how we do outreach in the communities. background about motivate, this is similar to the city bike program in new york. the program does operate the city bike program as wellies bike shares across the country
9:14 pm
including [inaudible] in the boston metro area and happy to return to the bay area to expand bike share here. some the benefits i touched on but to highlight and underscore some of them, bike share provides affordable [inaudible] 149 a year. this is a incredibly cost competitive way to commute around the bay area even compared against transit but bike share works nicely together. this is a more affordable option than car ownership oregon daily use of on demand rides. we are offering a discounted program for customers eligible for both the life line program and muni care, so we will have
9:15 pm
oo membership available for 5 dollars a month or 60 a year so we are able to make bike share accessible to everyone. bike share a form of active transportation, riders have indicated helthd benefits including loss of weight and feeling more active and energetic. over the course the program we expect that the number of single occupancy vehicle ridership will decrease which will bear on reducing the emissions in the bay area and congestion on the proceeds with additional cars that hopefully have stated home in the garages while people enjoy a bike ride. as mentioned this form of transportation is a excellent [inaudible] first last mile connecting with cal train, bart, muni and
9:16 pm
expands the horizon for how people commute athround bay and this arrival the system in the east bay that activates a additional set of peep lt that maybe don't drive over the bay bridge but take bart and completing their trip into san francisco with a bike. of course one the themes we heard today with the other initiatives up before the board is the safety of the communities and bike share moving more peep tool active transportation support vision zero and aim towards zero traffic related deaths. finally, the bike share will grow and need additional staff, bike mechanic squz checkers in the field, system rebalancers to make sure the bikeerize allocated properly to make sure we have a excellent customer experience for all the rider jz excited to offering green caller jobs that they provide a living wage and benefits. the scale
9:17 pm
of the system is expected to be 4500 bikes in san francisco. san jose will expand to 1 thousand bike squz east bay about 1500 bikes as well: each system will be its own bike share on its own and san francisco will be a very very dynamic environment for the bike share. i would like to talk about public outreach. as of the announcement of the turn key agreement in may we activated a station site on our website, bay area bike share and had thousands of request for bike share station which we see ask a positive design for public desire to have this transportation option. [inaudible] continue to
9:18 pm
contribute their ideas where they would like to the see bike shares. we are integrating the feedback into our initial site proposal and the maps that will be presented to the public through open sessions through next year and each of the phases of the roll out. we will present to the community small neighborhood snap shots of potential bike share location squz allow the community to have a very active conversation but what stations look like they may work and which spaces will not and what we may have missed. we are valuing the opportunities to hear from the public on this. this will result in a service area that touches all most all corners of san francisco and covers all 7
9:19 pm
communities of concern. we'll have a vibrant notework of bike share across san francisco and bay yauria and look forward to delivering that >> members of the public [inaudible] jurks one member the public is [inaudible] here? >> good afternoon. my name is [inaudible] i work for the san francisco bike coalition. the san francisco bike coalition is excited about the bike share expansion. for years our vision is see a world class bike share system with 7 thousand bikes, 4500 in san francisco this expansion is exactly that. we consider the upgraded bike share system to be san franciscos first new
9:20 pm
transit system in generations and the best way to achieve san franciscos green house gas emissions and [inaudible] goals. making bike share afortable and accessible provides low income communities a healthy transportation option and improve access to jobs and schools and other opportunities. [inaudible] by creating new transportation and bike related jobs, something for us is very important and for member thofz community who may not ride bikes will also be very important. we are proud to support motivate and the sfmta and work hard to insure the expansion progresss on schedule with robust public engagement. the san francisco bike coalition looks forward engaging the ebmize thoferb knhing months tooz make the bike share system the best possible. >> what is your plezer? >> i is no questions but make a
9:21 pm
motion to approve >> i have a couple questions maybe. i'm excited about the expansion the program 10 fold and it is great you show about the suggested location for sites because i had questions about that. two questions one a friend wanted me to ask about helmet, i know we don't have helmets that stations but some wish they could have helmets is that something discussed in other cities sit? >> in my most recent market in hub way thrfs a pilot for a helmet vending program and something the bike share industry that is young only 5 years olds in the u.s. is attempting but there isn't a model yet that is the perfect solution. i know seattle has a hellimate law that requires
9:22 pm
hellmet and delivery option as well and think it is snng we'll look at over time. in the mean time we have relationships with local vendors for discount helmets so riders can purchase. today it isn't part the roll out but something we can look at >> will you have sponsorship because the price is significantly more expensive than it is today and expanded so did ntd know if you would have sponsor like a new york city bike will we have that too? >> that is part the effort to source a sponsor for this program as well. that would be the title sponsor and the branding on the bikes would reflect that as well. >> motion to second? >> quick question, i appreciate the affordable and exwitable strat agthat you are pursuing and i have a feeling for some of us as affordable as
9:23 pm
5 dollars a monthss is i wuder is that something people can pay as they goory pay a up front 60 dollar a month membership fee? >> the idea is it a annual membership paid as a installment plan so 5 dollars per mounth, people have a way of paying cash for that? >> not today, but that is another bike share industry question we are working to solve. it is something i think we could incorporate in the program ovtime but as of today we are not able to do that >> i encourage you to try tapush it. there are a lot [inaudible] for one reason or another and imagine that is the type oof community we would like to reach deeper into so encourage you to look for ways to address that. >> we have a motion and second. all in
9:24 pm
favor aye. opposed, no. the ayes have. thank you very much. >> presentation discussion of action regarding the residential permit parking program evaluation and reform project. mr. chairman, no member rosales of the public submitted a speaker cards. >> excellent presentation i might add. >> good afternoon chairman nolan and drerkts ted [inaudible] i'm joined by cathy [inaudible] rpp reform project manager. at the march 3 meeting the board asked staff to provide update on the reform program. today we
9:25 pm
will provide that update and [inaudible] the rpp program was establish said in 1976 [inaudible] also in technology. for example, while establishing [inaudible] specifically at the time had board requested a staff to evaluate access to short term parkic permits pricing pr motorcycles business [inaudible] and consideration for time limit frz visitors. in given the sfmta realized the [inaudible] and awarded a federal grant to ensue the work. to provide detail on the status of the evaluation a [inaudible] i turn the presentation to cathy. >> thank you ted. what we have here is a flow chart as a major component of the project and the timeline. we are
9:26 pm
all most complete with our research program and expect to be complete with that in february and at that point we'll start the next phase which is identifying specific issuewise the rpp program and drafting possible policy solutions. public outreach and engagement process which starts this week. by a year from now fall, 2016 we'll present to the board a evaluation report that includes recommendations for a policy and process changes. for some context, this is a map of the 29 rpp areas and as you can see from that map it covers about a 4th the sit aiz
9:27 pm
geographic area and includes 40 pert of all households and 28 of all on street parking spaces. as you can see from the map is the size of the-air -air area varies. as far as program actirfbsty is concerned in the last fiscal year we [inaudible] 90 thousand residential permits. our research shows that despite the fact houses are able to purchase up to 4 permits, 94 percent of the houses purchase one or two permits. we are aggregating data from multiple sources includinging the census by rpp area. this is how we will
9:28 pm
display the findings at meetings and the report. it is useful at the meetings because we are able to give out information to the community working in. the permitsuchuation rate, permits issued per available on street parking space is of particular concern through most of the city, the ratio is 1 to 1 or less, however, there is a number of areas in the city where it is up to 1.5. as i said, we have a robust public engagement process, the first phase is in 2 phases and the first phase is about building awareness. we begin that this week. we send
9:29 pm
briefs to associations, merchants groups and other stakeholders. we have a house hold survey being launched this week that will be a random survey to house throughout the city and we expect about 1600 responses from that. the second phase is when the research is done and that is when we go out into the had community can presentations we have 2 rounds of pleasanitations. the first rowd is sharing the findings and engage thg community about their parking issues and haepfully getting into possible solutions. the second roundf presentations goes back to the community with possible policy options thereat are based on a research findings and public input. so,
9:30 pm
we have-that is a brief overview the project, but we are not waiting until had thofend project to make program impluvment said. we made an aloneance for electric mopeds and bring the program into the 21 century. we launched our petition that makes it easier to [inaudible] we are tailoring or parking strategies towards neighborhood particularly neighborhood context. woe just completed a thorough parking occupancy and utilization survey in 5 large areas the city. compiling data by rpp area and issuing the house survey thatd goes out in the next couple days will provide
9:31 pm
information about access to vehicles, access to parking, awareness the program and satisfy action. the next step is continue with the phase 1 of the public engagement to finish our research project and then initiate the next phase and come back a year from now with policy recommendations. >> thank you very much. member thofz board questions ? >> this is a exciting and appreciate getting the update on this. i think it is a big piece of parking policy in san francisco to chew on and slide 6 tells us why it is such a big piece. that is what people rerch to as the license to hunt versus the permit to park. there are so many more permits sold then legal parking spots. that is fascinating data to see. how
9:32 pm
much of-you don't know yet but assume a good portion the reform or what we need to do we may include state legislative changes since i understand we are a little bit prescribed what we can do at the state level. i think howard straussner isn't here to remind us the cost to park for a year is slightly more than the monthly muni pass. >> yes. that is a issue, prop 218 as you murd many times related to the commuter shuttle program limits to cost rescorfbry so we can't use price as a way to manage demand but we have ideas working with that but it requires us going city council to be sure. >> i have no other questions and pleased to see the update and fascinateding to see what you come up with and good look. it is a big piece
9:33 pm
to chew on and really important. [inaudible] those people who don't own cars are also paying more to park per day than if they were-for the year proportioninately so it is a example as is the commuter shuttle bus program that as the face the sitee changes the face of transportation is changing and how we look at curb spaces is changing quickly. >> member the board. seems like it is a very thoughtful approach to this and look forward to further reports of the progress happens. anything else for the board today? >> mr. chairman that concludes the business brf ber you today. >> we'll adjourn the meetsing in honor och mary king and hopefully you can get a letter to her family. meeting adjourned.
9:34 pm
9:35 pm
>> gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. and welcome to the san francisco transportation authority mom meeting i'm supervisor wiener the chair and mr. clerk. >> roll call commissioner avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos supervisor christensen

48 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on