tv Government Access Programming SFGTV May 1, 2018 8:00am-9:01am PDT
significant traffic generators over there far out numbers the total number of parking spaces on the street, that total number of parking spaces on the street isn't going to change at all. so we have a problem. what that doesn't consider is the fact that with 80% of the spaces currently unregulated there's people attracted to the neighborhood because of the free ugh regulated parking. they don't work there or spend money there. they are using it for free parking and taking up spaces from people who need them. so when you have lots and lots of demand you get the higher parking occupancy we see in the city. so the d dog patc really stands out. when you have over 100% occupancy when people park in front of driveways and thing that are not
legal you get this. this is 23rd street at minnesota street. i took this picture myself. i walked up and snapped the tphot. there's people double parking, running in to get coffee, double and triple parking causing challenging traffic conditions. that's not a street that's working very well for anybody. then i walked up to 22nd street and this is what was going on right when i walked up to take the picture. a fed-ex truck making deliveries. that means the 48 is stuck behind double parkers, people on bikes have to swing into oncoming traffic. it's a mess. it's only going to get worse. this is a graph of the development that's finished or planned for the next couple of years in the dog patch. just in the neighborhood the number of residents is set to double. there's the pier 70 project this
is set to add an entire neighborhood just next year, the power -- just next door, the power plant project will do the same thing. they are setting upper if the future. so regulations are necessary. i think most people agree on that. the question is what is it going to be. if it was a more traditional san francisco neighborhood this is a more straightforward process. this is what the inner sunset looks like. blue, retail, green residential and orange industrial. here the relations are straightforward. we create the tourp -- the turn over. to the extent people in the residential areas want it we provide residential parking. not much industrial or anything
else to consider. this is what the dog patch looks like from landing perspective. it's a former industrial area that also has a historic core of old victorian homes, a couple of commercial strips growing and lots and lots aof new development. this is a more challenging area to regulate. we have residential and retail and commercial and industrial all in the same place, sometimes on the same block. sometimes there's committspeed competing speeding spaces. this look -- competing spaces. this looks
bet ore a huge board. we try to associate with the dog patch negotiation and business association. we formed a working group from residents, businesses, industry that met frequently to hash out differences and understand what regulations make the most sense. kept the supervisor's office well informed, a lot of briefings with them. you saw via e-mail that the dog patch association did vote in favor of this plan. that shows that we have support from the neighborhood associations. also we made a lot of attempts to reach out to people who weren't necessarily plugged into the neighborhood associations. sent letters to all the addresses in the dog patch, an e-mail blast to anyone who expressed interest and tried to call that from other city agencies who were also doing work gathering their e-mail lists so we could make sure as many people heard about it. we had six open houses.
some of them we put on ourselves. a lot of coverage in the city paper. lots and lots of meetings. i feel like the dog patch is my second home now. i've been in meetings just to inform people about the whole plan or their whole block trying to oblige as many people as possible. last month we got a lot of useful information at the public hearing that the director was kind enough to join us for. i think that you'll hear from some of the folk who is -- folks who we worked with. it's a challenge to please everybody. i don't know if we approved 100% on that score. that i think you'll hear from the community. i'm glad to hear that. it's important to note that one of the largest stake holders in the dog patch is us. at sfmta we employ over 1,000 people at several sites across the neighborhood. so we wanted to
make sure that we did end reach to our colleagues in transit to make sure they were part of that process, understood why we were there and why the neighborhood association asked us to be there. we learned a lot from those meetings. we talked with union leaders. some of the things we learned is a lot of the people working as bus drivers or bus operators live in places where transit is not accessible or leave to work or get home at a time when transit is not an option. on top of that they're reporting to work in the dog patch but may be taking a bus or truck to a project site and may might be who knows where after two or four times whether end the time limit would be up. so the time limits wouldn't work for them. that helped us develop what you'll see is adding no time limit paid parking around some
divisions to acknowledge that doing nothing is not an option but putting in regulations that are going to make it impossible for people to get to work is also not an option. so trying to strike a balance there. i'll talk about the particular regulations in just a minute. also recognize that people were interested in finding ways to get to work that didn't involve driving if -- in their own car. so worked with the planning subdivision. john knox-white and his team did a lot of great work on developing along with our transit team with a shuttle that can take people from bart. so for the people who need to get to bart and get on the first train could take a shuttle from bart over to the five different facilities in the dog patch and get dropped off at work and not have to drive, not have to woe y about crossing the bridge. why we heard this may be hard we also heard from people who said
that they had a 7:00 a.m. start time but had to arrive at 5:00 a.m. and sleep in their car for two hours to find a parking spot. we heard from people that parking had gotten much, much worse just in the last couple of years as new development goes in. i think that people understood that doing nothing was not an option and we are trying to make it easier for people to get to work and trying to acknowledge that people might have to drive but pay a little bit. i'm hoping to roll out on site carpool parking spaces to get on site, park for free if you're able to double or triple up with some other coworkers. so to get to the proposed regulations we took all of what we learn from the end reach and sort of framed it around some basic principals that we wanted to adhere to. like we want the regulations to correspondent to the use to the best extent possible. the dog patch is
mixed use but we want to not have residential parking in front of a bus maintenance yard and have meters on a purely residential street, that kind of thing. we put most of the park, in the north where the residents are, the time limit in the southeast where it's mostly industrial and then no time limit meters that i talked around and woods and around the west side of the neighborhood. with sort of scattered retail oriented meters in front of businesses that need that turn over for their customers. one other consideration is trying to make sure that if you have a block that has four different land uses we wanted to resist the urge to do four different types of parking regulation on that one block. so trying to find ways to have one consistent regulation at least on one side of the street to make it easier for visitors and people who live there and make it easier for endorsement folks. this is what the plan looks like. i have a larger copy that i can put
underneath the projector if that's helpful. i know that you have it on your screens. i won't get into the block by block that describes how things have played out across the neighborhood. i think it's useful to talk about some of the ways that this ultimate plan was shaped by the out reach that we -- what we heard from our -- out reach. we are proposing between 20th street and mariposa proposing one-hour residential parking there. that was a request of the community saying that we see folks who come down and take advantage where there's free parking of the neighborhood where as they would have to pay if they parked on campus. a 4-hour or 2-hour time limit is not enough to persuade people. people would take enough coffee break to get that free parking be you if you have 1-hour limits they would encourage them to park on campus.
>> chairman brinkman: i'm sorry. a question? > >> board member torres: on that point you mean the one on mariposa. >> the mission bay campus. >> board member torres: that's not just a problem for that area. about the davies medical center people don't want to pay and take up all the parking. are you looking at these areas as well in the future? >> we absolutely can. i heard that is -- those sorts of sites that you described hospital campuses are a perfect example of what residential permit parking is for. it's to discourage people who are working nearly to take advantage of free parking in the neighborhoods near by. i think there's residential parking around davies campus. >> board member torres: well, they are not working number one. number two, i've been told that the s parking permit is so large
of an area that people drive from other parts of the city and park there because they center an s permit. can you provide me the map of the s area to see whether -- how large that is. it seems to be too large for what is happening and impacting those areas. >> we can do that. we'll be back in a month and a half to talk more detail about that problem. >> chairman brinkman: thank you, director torres. director wilson, you know where your next community is going to come in and ask you to swoop in and save them. >> thank you. meters with no time limit in areas where we expect that there will be more employee parking to accommodate that but also to help open up spaces for people who need to visit, perhaps have appointme s
appointments. there's a time limit to encourage turn over. the 4-hour time limits in most industrial areas is aimed at the lightest regulations that we can do to discourage all the people looking for that free ugh -- unregulated all day parriking. they should get on the t. one of the things not on the bullet point hire but is worth noting, there's minnesota and south of 23rd that i show yokeded you a e
of before, it's perpendicular but the problem is most of the east side is industrial and needs loading and loading working better with parallel parking. so we proposed to put parallel parking on the east side, perk -- it we perpendicun the west side. when it comes to residential parking permits specifically we are proposing -- i showed you earlier that about 80% of the parking in the area is unregulated. that 20% is almost exclusively rpp area x. this will be expanded and relabeled at area e. director
coar people might be coming down here to park near cal train and go down south. that prevents that sort of thing. this helps do lower caps two for household and one for driver cap to try to get at that internal demand that we talked about at previous residence -- presentations. we made the conscious policy choice to draw the map of eligibility which you should be able to see. specifically it's made to bring the transportation code in align wme wment -- alignment with the planning code. the reason for that is to encourage people to move into those buildings. if the mta then issues people with parking permits to park on the streets and we are really
undercuts that policy director it comes down as all things do with parking in this neighborhood to the numbers. we are projected to add something like 1500 housing units in the next few years. if all of those people come and have one or two cars there's not any place to put them. i do want to mention that it's under construction on the 22nd street green connection project that's going to beautify the street cascape of 22nd. wee worked directly with the planning department on the public realm plan. they pushed some things further east. we will say this might be coming your way, happy to work with you on phase two. then also working
with streets and transit as i mentioned. level streets working on small project on indiana street and then to make sure that the constituents who said our real desire is more for transit in the dog patch to talk about what kind of improvements we can make there. so before i go, a few questions that have come up as part of the out reach that i thought i would just give you the answers that we've been giving the public, things that have come up over and over again. you say there's lots and lots of parking demand here, so why not just park in the garage. the answer is that is city charter essentially says that we can't build a garage because it would take money away from operations. given that a garage would cost probably tens of millions of dollars to accommodate the kind of demand that we see here it's safe to assume this would take away from operations. also this board would have to approve a garage comporting with the transit first policy that would be a tough case the make in this
example. similarly a lot of folks said why not give permit to workers in the area to park. we heard this from transit workers saying what about permits for transit workers, pdr workers, folks who work in the retail businesses and may be approving early or leaving late. that sill -- that illustrates why permits wouldn't work. if you give everybody a permit you might not as well not have any regulations because then they are moved because everybody can park everywhere. i think it's important to remember that as i've said a lot of the reason for this regulation is to move along all the folks who don't actually have any business in the dog patch center, are just using it for that free parking. the point is to open up spaces for the workers and the people who live there and shop there. others have said, well, we have demand responsive pricing now throughout the city. you say
that you're going to start these rates low but doesn't that mean they are going to go up over time. the answer is my operation ex-- experience has been is going from free parking to any price at all is a big change. that moves a lot of people along and getting them to change their behavior or makes them go over to the next place that has free parking. even a $050 an hour rate we won't see packed blocks to lead to price increases. it's worth noting that we had the mayor's rate adjustment completed in march. 80% saw no change at all. so most of the time the rates don't change even under normal conditions and going from free to a price is not really a very normal condition. i think lastly, again, the option of doing nothing means thing wills get -- continue to get worse as
they have in the last couple of years. finally -- sorry, two more. one is that how will these parking regulations address -- we all know the words and that's going to bring lots and lots of traffic to the area. how do these regulations respond to that? the answer is these regulations themselves are not intended to address an event, the kind of parking that would happen during a warriors game or beyonce concert. they are intended to set the stage for saying that parking is regulated in do -- dog patch, don't think that you can park for free all day. it's not going to work that way. we will use the examples that we have in the parking areas as based solutions that will come back to this board and the neighborhood to address that. finally, how do we know this is successful? you think this will work. i think success is going to depend on your perspective and what is
happening on that particular block and what the regulation is. really we want to create some ability. we are at 103%. if you have a reason to be there you can find a space. you may have to move your car or pay but you'll be able to find a space to put your car. i think that's the main goal. we've done pretty extensive data collection and after we put them in place we will do after data collection. people have things they see that are working well or not working and might want to change. we are certainly open to that. so that is all that i've got. thank you so much for your time. i did want to thank the curve management team for their work on that, andy, tracy, becca, pamela johnson from combhun -- communications and
kathy who took that call and led this project to here. we think this is a well thought out plan. it may not address every parking problem out there but we hope you see fit to. i can answer questions now or after public comment. thank you. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. i think that we'll go to the public comment and come back with questions and clarifications. any public comment? >> yes, madame chair. >> chairman brinkman: 2 minutes. >> thank you for your time today. we would like to ask for your support and approval on this plan. i called kathy back in november of 2015. it's been a long engaging process. we've had a lot of disagreements from a lot of neighbors. i think
that we've come to a compromise and a good solution at this time. our neighbor has already doubled so we are looking to triple the population of the neighborhood. we welcome that and the density of the neighborhood. we just need a plan to engage the neighbors as well as the parking condition which right now is 24/7 and free so we would like to change that. i do want to thank kathy and hank for their persistent and their engagement in this process. it's one of the more unusual and engaging endeavors that the city has come into the dog patch with so thank you for that. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'm sherra tanner. we've been in business in the city for close to 45 years. we are on the dog patch on the southern end where caesar chavez is. i
just want to second this things that bruce said. really thank kathy for coming out and meeting with us. we representing a pdr business are one of those businesses that is greatly challenged by any kind of parking regulation because we operate 24/7, 7 days a week and almost every single day of the year. so it's difficult for our staff. we deliver. we are a produce wholesaler. so we have driving on the road for many days on end and to put limits and to put meters as originally planned around our areas and our businesses but not just our business it would be great impacted. i really appreciate the chance to weigh in and to be heard and i think i speak for my business when i say that. last thing i just want to say is i think it's a very complex and difficult situation that we have bubbling up in the dog patch and
i think that we probably will be back at some point as the residents fill in and all of these things fill in. very difficult for pdr businesses such as our to maintain viability with the kind of work that we do in an increasingly residential area. >> chairman brinkman: thank you very much. next. >> good afternoon, directors. thank you for all of this. i've been hearing -- the concern i have is this, i work for the seating county and all this area is going to be effected. it's going to be relying on all of us and everything i see for all transportation. they will have to pay a permit. i have a meeting with hank wilson i think that was two to three weeks ago.
i suggested since he had mentioned the meeting -- i'm sorry but this one is going to take a little bit longer. i'm very concerned. sorry for this thing. i'm very stroeszed with this thing. -- stressed with this thing. for us as employers the stress and is in the public and then the parking and then the directors and then our own employees. the concern i have is this, you're going to put $0.50 for each hour and be a driver or custodian and any kind of employee from the city and county and be worried about $0.50 and then have to worry about a ticket. then we have to deal with confusion. my suggestion to him before is that to provide us a parking space that would limit stress for us.
the city and county employees have the stress all over so how do you expect us to work and provide services to the employees and the residents. the residents have been there before. the unit was there before and we didn't have the kind of problem. that i have to provide a parking space for employees then i'll go for it. this isn't going to work for all employees. we work 24/7 and this -- >> [bell ringing] >> chairman brinkman: thank you so much for coming down. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon board members. i'm hector cardona and
i'm a resident in san francisco. i feel this penalizes workers in the area for the belief that there's people parking in the area that don't work in the area. on top of that the traffic conditions that we have saw in the slides, those are traffic conditions we see throughout the city even when there's metered parking or limits to the parking, mission street big 1 example, polk street down the street. so we spoke about the arrival -- these plans for the people that arrive during times that are unsafe. even the plan about a shuttle going from bart to some of the work locations and such. i think that the plans are actually, you know, partial, you know, to a certain degree there. the success rate wouldn't be so good. the reason being is that some of the arrival times are at
times that bart is not even running. so the shuttle program would only cater to a certain amount of employees. what i'm truly asking for is your -- just your consideration with the blocks that are around the woods, creek, 700 pennsylvania area. people have developed a rhythm to be able to commute to work and park there. so this -- the introduction of this plan will add a row configuration of the plan that people developed. i would like to ask that the board consider the block surrounding this area in particular. i don't think that the whole plan is bad -- >> [bell ringing] >> chairman brinkman: thank you very much. next speaker, please. sgl
>> good afternoon, directors. i'm kelly redneck. 22nd street is one of my projects and also minnesota street, two projects where where he -- we see a lot of double parking. i just wanted to talk about the collaboration that hank, kathy and their team have undertaken with this parking plan. i was involved just in the times when they needed me but it was very smooth coordination and particularly on minnesota street that hank spoke about. we worked on the street designing plan. i just wanted to let you know that the coordination marine the department and the planning department and their
dog patch public realm plan that i was also staffing was great. it's a great example of city collaboration. thank you. >> chairman brinkman: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm glenn texira and i run also. we have 150 employees depending on the day. about 80 of them have to dive just because they come from across the bay or wherever they may come from. very difficult to do that. most of our people are in the service industry or the service portion of the business so they are out driving most of the day so they wouldn't have the ability to change meters and that kind of thing. having said that, i came to the last meeting very late in the game, probably 11th hour and was
ve oh -- very opposed to the plan. i've been educated on what the dog patch has done and hank has done. i'm here today surprisingly -- at least surprising my wife after hearing my complaining that i'm in support of the plan. i've appreciated the process that hank and his team engaged with my company to make sure that we were taken care of. they actually did a nice job. there were a couple of small adjustments that's were very helpful and it looks like it will be able to work. so i'm pleased. i hope you do say adopt this plan i have a couple of hopes and i have accepted what has come by so far. there's a number of people i understand that need to be accommodated. we are one of them. so i wanted to say thank you. thank you, thank you, guys. hopefully it all works so thank you very much.
>> chairman brinkman: thank you. next weeker. >-- next speaker. >> no one else has. >> chairman brinkman: if you could fill out a speaker card when you are done. >> good afternoon, commissioners. since i've seen your last -- >> chairman brinkman: your name please. >> july christianson. i'm not here representing my board or our stakeholders by as an employee who does work in the street scape in the city in conjunction with your employees. i'm here in support of the plan. our organization's mandate doesn't include decisions about whether residential stickers should go or whatnot. a lot of the work that we are trying too -- to do is interlaced very appropriately. my message is mr. wilson said we cannot leave things the way they are.
secondly in gratitude for not only the over all work on this program but some specific work that others have done to help us solve some previously intractable projects. problems we've got the parking lot. we have the t line when parking is $100 a day downtown there's a lot of people using the easy way out. we are their parking lot. the people who work for an organization who doesn't have a plan for where they are supposed to park, the ucsf that's having the impact and our pdr businesses which we love and want to support. i think the over all message here is that an awful lot of these employees can not afford to live in the city and are finding it very difficult to come and do their jobs and we can't live without
them. we've got new attractions like the minnesota street project and a population expected to quintuple by 2025. all of these things are not going to be resolved by this project this will hope -- >> [bell ringing] >> chairman brinkman: thank you so much. >> jr hefler. >> good afternoon. i'm the president of the neighborhood association and i've been involve in this project since january of 2016 when i made a last ditch effort when i tried to convince hank and kathy to come to patrol hill and do us first and dog patch second. we fail in that. we spent a 2-year process and that had everything in a neighborhood parking discuss that lasts for 2 years including a successful
resolution. it will give us a baseline to further adapt the plan in order to meet what the actual needs are. the dog patch neighborhood much like the north slope of the hill, must like the north each mission is where we have a lot of commuter parking. we can't assess our native parking needs with commuter parking there. we have to make a first guess of what it is that will work for the neighborhood and then tailor it in the future. i do hope this board is receptive to changes they come across. i know the parking team has been receptive including the changes that popped up in the final moment of the last several week that is we've been able to accommodate those businesses that were new to the process is very -- a very positive step. forward looking with all difference to director torres, we hope they come to our neighborhood next. we suffer the same issues on a mixed hill slope that dog hatch has and the same parking concerns from the
warriors arena and from the intensification of use in the neighborhood. thank you very much. >> chairman brinkman: thank you very much. do i have anymore public comment? no. seeing none public comment is closed. mr. wilson, i suspect there will be a few questions. i will start us off with one or two. the there were a couple of things that really caught my interest and i just want to clarify them. the no rpp for new developments, i understand the thinking on that since parking is unbundled in those new buildings and it might be cheaper to buy an rpp and hunt for it. is this the first time we have done in in city or are there developments? >> there are scattered examples where we have excluded. so
adding however many cars that would be added by 100 or 300 unit building just didn't go work. >> chairman brinkman: that's interesting. i just wanted to see if this was the first time we were doing it and now it's not. for the parking meters that will be going in, you mentioned they will start out at $0.50 a meter and there's no time limit on the meters and people can prepay. so for people who arrive at work at 6:00 and the meters don't start for a couple out of hours they will be able to prepay and it will tick away once it starts running, correct? >> correct. i have a couple of slides to show you to illustrate if that's useful. >> chairman brinkman: yes, that would be helpful. thank you. >> this is what it likes like when you -- this is at 5:00 a.m. and you walk up and it says no payments are required until 9:00 a.m. but you can prepay now. so you want to pay for four hours, you do that and after a couple of minutes this is what it looks
like. it says 7 hours and 58 minutes. you're paid for the next 7 hours and 58 minutes even though you only paid for 4 hours. >> and you can't do that before 5:00 a.m.? >> you can do that starting at 4:30 in the morning. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. as you said, the rates will start at $0.50 an hour and with responsive pricing you do quarterly updates, correct, so they would not be updated more than on a quarterly basis in the year. >> that's right. >> chairman brinkman: they go up or down by $0.25 so not like it's going to jump to $2 or $3. >> that's right. i would add they don't just go up or down by $0.25, most stay the same. >> chairman brinkman: you did point that out. that sounds like it's going to be helpful. now my concern is for our mt a employees. as people mentioned, this is going to be a big change for our facilities down there.
when you gave me a briefing we talked about this. we don't expect -- the option is on the table to work for everybody, not one option is going to work for everybody. the options that we will lay out working with the facilities will helpfully work for enough of our employees so it takes some of the crunch off and those that absolutely need to drive and need to find a place to park will have a much better opportunity of doing that. basically we are doing transportation to management for our own employees in the area. what's the timeline for implementation for the rpps and what's the time lime for the work that we are doing with those facilities to help them figure out transportation for the employees? >> well, i -- so the -- the plan is to have the shuttle up and running before the parking regulations are installed so people have an option to get on that shuttle if they want to. we are hoeping the shuttle will be running in june. i think for the parking regulations it's going to depend on the signs
verses meters installed by two different shops. they are procured in two different ways. assuming this board approves august is a safe bet for when we can start to see signs and meters going up. >> chairman brinkman: good. one final question as a couple of the business owners in the area mentioned, it's a big change for them as well. congratulations on working so closely with them to getting people to the place where they are accepting of this. do we have any opportunities for the area business owners, somewhere they can go that's kind of a clearinghouse for the same things that we are going to work on for our employees that they will be able to look at and say maybe we can offer this, maybe we can offer that, how about we do this? >> i don't want to put my colleague on the spot but i'll do it anyways. >> so we don't have a specific place on our website that does that. we are willing to work with them. the department of
environment partners with them clo closely. >> chairman brinkman: that's going to be a good resource for the area business owners to know. that's all of my questions. vice chair? >> vice chair heinicke: sure. >> chairman brinkman: all right. >> vice chair heinicke: so thank you for the residence -- presentations. very well done. that's certainsally --s that's personally grat fieing for your. our friend was here, i wish you would have went to him first. take that as a compliment that it is. this is a residential program in part. maybe i missed it. do we have feedback from the dog patch neighborhood association or whatever the name of that group is? i ashould it is sporlt i
have. -- i assume they have support. >> the suggestion about free parking for people who aren't working and shopping there, the suggestion is people are using this basically as a long-term parking lot leaving their car there is and then coming back and getting them. >> that's the insenduation. >> vice chair heinicke: so you talked about double parking and obstru obstructing vehicles. is this program going to address that. do you think that regulating parking will lead to fewer people double parking and object -- obstructs -- obstructing roads? >> if no one is moving you'll
have more double parking than turn over. in any visits to the neighborhood we see really, really high parking occupancy, just nowhere to park. even if you were someone who was there and you really wanted to find a space to pull over and unload your goods or grab your coffee there's no one to do it. this is going to open up some spaces. it's also going to bring more enforcement to the neighborhood because there will be regulations to enforce which makes people think twice about double parking >> vice chair heinicke: very good. i appreciate the time limits. i think that will be helpful. the lingering question is one of employee relations. we've heard from one business that's come down with a rather uncommon compliment for you and very eloquently stated how this works and other businesses say they think it's going to work but want other accommodations.
the one business we happen to run, the feedback we've gotten is the employees are concerned about this. we heard about san francisco being an expensive place to live and we heard about where other businesses have the drive. i got the strong sense that some people working at that facility need to drive too. i'm asking an open ended question, is there something further we can do beyond this proposal or explore that is going to make our employees who drive to that facility feel they have been heard and that i have needs are addressed so they don't have as our speaker said more stress worries about parking meters as they are out there keeping our riders safe? >> i have a couple of thoughts on that. one is with the shuttle and the carpool spaces i think that's there's only one bullet point. there was a comment about that it runs when bart is not running. i think
that's not right. i think that the plan is that the shuttle will take people from the very first part coming into the city. the earliest we can shuttle people over we will be doing that. that's a big step. that's a big deal. i think it shows a commitment to practice what we preach. >> vice chair heinicke: have we out reach today -- out reach today the union? i understand that dealing with individual employees is important but maybe the most important thing is to let the union represent its folks. >> yeah, so as mentioned we met with them a few weeks ago. we met with the heads -- we have workers in the dog patch area. a lot of people came from actually work in the dog patch area. we heard the story about one who works at 7:00 but gets to work at 5:00 and sleeps in
her car because that's the only way she can find parking. i remember going a year and a half ago my first visit to woods division to talk about this and the idea was not -- the idea of putting in meters around the yard was not well received, it's not something that i think people are excited about. when it gets to the point where we say, well, is parking easy now and the answer is no and it's like -- i think the point we try to make is having to wake up 2 hours early to get to work is stress and having to circle and circle looking for parking is stressful. so something that could open up spaces if you really do have to drive could reduce stress. now obviously
it's a little bit of money that people have to pay but given that there are other options they can open up some spaces. i think it's hopefully a good thing. >> vice chair heinicke: that makes sense to me. i'm prepared to support this proposal but let me say one thing. on this particular issue i'm wearing two hats. i'm the parking regulator but also the employer and these are our folks. so i would appreciate if -- i'm sure this would happen anyways but we reach out to the union and/or if this is effecting service because people are unable to get to work or their commute is effected we want to know about that and work with them to revisit it. you know, with that dialogue open and with our union representatives clearly understanding that this board
and your staff i'll prepare it. i think that you did a wonderful job with theis presentation. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. >> if i can just make a few comments -- >> chairman brinkman: i don't think your microphone is on. >> maybe now. all right. i just really wanted to express my gratitude to mr. wilson and everyone that was involved. it's clear that this has been an incredible journey and it's -- it really is for -- for me it sort of sets up a model for what i'm hoping we can do all across the city. the problem that you describe that the residents and the employers and everyone else is grappling with is something that we are struggling with all over the city. so i'm very eager to take the lessons
learned from this and do it even faster next time and then look back at this in a year or two and see how we can make this particular place even better. i too am very concerned about the employees. i think our own employees but then i think about if we can prepay for $0.50 an hour that's $4 for an 8-hour day and you can park for an unlimited time. >> that's right. >> if you are paying $4 for an 8-hour shift that's an incredible deal. i know other agencies that charge $250 a month for a parking space. i want to make sure that we are recognizing the context of where we are right now with respect to the storm that is coming with all this additional growth and development that is to come. i do want to call out the
complexity of the map and the way that this all been laid out. i think that it's phenomenal. i feel like that i'm looking at a wiring diagram on slide 14 that you had up there. it makes me think about the needs for enforcement and to make sure that, you know, people start to figure out that where you park on one place is going to be different from how you might park in another place. when we are pricing our parking as low as $4 and the parking passes that are a bargain i want to cover the enforcement and to make sure that the parking is working the way that you've designed it to be implemented. so i guess my question is, if it works out where we need to raise the fees either to create the kind of turn over that we need
or to get the enforcement that we need i trust that folks would be receptive to revisiting the cost of this parking that we are creating here. >> well, i think that goes back to the responsive pricing that this board approved back in december. one of the themes of that was that we set parking rates based on demand. we don't set them just to, you know, balance budgets or raise revenue. i do think that at $0.50 an hour we are probably not making money on these meters and we are really using them as the best available parking management tool and not as a way to raise revenue for the agency. over all the costs and the revenue for meters are about balanced out across the city. so obviously a meeteder is charge -- meeting that is charging $4 will subsidize a meter that charges $0.50 an
hour. we assume we will sell more permit that is will bring in more money that we can use. with the enforcement director, he and i have walked the entirety of the neighborhood and talked about all proposed regulations. . -- regulations. he's well aware that it is coming but said that he has team is red for it. they are also rolling out improvements in the neighborhoods. i'm optimistic that the enforcement will be effective. >> great. and just to be clear for the watching public and folk that is are taking notes, i want to remind everybody that at least i think that we are all on the same page with respect to we are not -- our intent i think with meters parking and getting turn over is to help generate the sales tax and i think
that's why they operate. i hope that we are creating parking that's available for customers that want to utilize the businesses and what have you. i also want to really, really thank the neighborhood associations and the staff report that you presented quoted the president of the boosters from saying that we are all going to have too deal with a little bit of pain but it's a whole lot less pain that if we do nothing. i thought that was a great way of framing what we are in. i'm deeply, deeply appreciative of all the patience and commitment that everybody led to this and i'm look fog what -- looking forward to the results.
>> recognizing at this point in time is an opportunity to rethink how we do that work. one of the central points is i mentioned our partner departments they were partners, this was a ground up effort where it wasn't one lead agency and support agencies but this was collaborative throughout this work. the process really focused on three streams. in yellow is a public stream where we were out engaging with every day san francisco trying to talk to folks who won't find us. the central green stream is a futures task force that brought together 100 invited folks for two and a half days of intensive workshops where we got to dive deep and think ambitiously about what 50 years in the future of san francisco could look like and the bottom stream is the darker blue is city staff really supporting and facilitating
conversations. it was a conversation and not single touch points but something that we've come back to using different tools. noticing the first circle is where we're here today and this is the initial phase of this over all program and there's more exciting work to come. i'll talk about that at the very end. i mentioned the nature of our outreach. we really took on the challenge to try to reflect not just the folks who can come find us and want to engage on transportation but every day people who experience it. it's part of their life but it's not top of mind. we obviously used online surveys to try to reach volumes of people. we took on a couple of new techniques focus groups and we sat down for a couple hours with small groups in communities, in language, across using different