tv Government Access Programming SFGTV April 22, 2019 2:00am-3:01am PDT
something the mta staff presentation and the community discussion did not address. i'm a regular scooter and bicycle share users. i've been knocked off my rented bike once and in the hospital. it was described as being an outstanding protected bike lane. as soma riders know. second street bicycle lane is not protected or much of a bike lane. neither collision however was the fault of a single negligent driver who should have just paid mor attention. personal responsibility is never a solution. the fault was with the transit system that treats cars and bicycles and scooters as equals on the road drivers to respect that supposed equality. in this system it's not surprising that drivers treat non drivers more like pests than legitimate road users. in this system, how can we blame scooter users who ride on the sidewalk. they are unsafe on the road. the greater risk bike and scooters users are exposed to and a great are harms caused by
carsment they include dangerous collisions and also extend to cars and massive contribution to pollution and climate change and domination of public safe. a better system would respect the commitment to vision zero installing a network set of bicycle lanes on basically every street in the city. furthermore, i want to state that if cars are inconvenienced by these changes it should be a benefit of the policy. thank you, very much. >> thank you, very much. do i have anyone else -- >> my name is key shawn. i just wanted to say scoot has a community plan that provides 50% discount on low income residents as well as non-profit organizations qualifying is easy. scoot is visibility as community partner and transparent with their intentions. thank you. >> thank you, very much. and that looks that it's it for
public comment. i'm sure wore going to have a few questions and input. >> i really appreciate the public commenter who raised the -- i really appreciate the public commenter who raids the accessibility concern because i'm a huge proponent of this program and i'd like to see it expand. and i will talk about that later. i think it's very real for people with disabilities to feel very fearful on the sidewalk when a very high speed vehicle that they may not have been able to see goes by. i just want to acknowledge that as a very real experience for people. i tend to go pretty fast so it doesn't -- i understand that me personally, i feel a little bit differently about it. i understand, i've heard that over and over again in the community. so that brings me to my second point which a lot of other speakers did raise which is that we absolutely need to emphasize
our need for protected bike ways across the city. because, if we do that we can increase the number of scooters, they can be protected in bike ways and they won't be on the sidewalks and i just think it will be very good. we need to create the infrastructure to keep these users safe and it helps keep the pedestrians on the sidewalks safe. and the other -- so that goes to my third point, which is, i know there's a big push for in stalling bike racks and with the lock-two mechanisms this is more of an important issue so i just wonder, it would be great to hear staff feedback on if we think we can meet the demand for all these scooters and getting them locked properly. especially by the ferries there are so many opportunities to put in bike racks and it would be very fully utilized. i would like to hear about that. and our plans.
>> i'll um jump to answer the bike rack questions. it goes beyond the scooter programment we're absolutely committed to expand be rapidly our bike rack installations. we have a backlog of bike racks that we were trying to get out and installed right now. we've been increase our staffing in our shop. it's our employees that install the rack as well as making sure no one in san francisco has to wait long to see both the inspection and the installations. this is a work in progress. wore looking to get them installed and they benefit everybody. scooter, bicycle share and they benefit anybody who wants to use the sidewalks by keeping order. >> do we work with the port on that? do they request bike racks on
the embarkadero. >> we definitely work with the port to support the bike racks they need as well. definitely. >> and i just have one final question about the scooter share. a lot of people thought of geographic expansion and i know that this is a pilot period we're looking at so are we going to expand the geographic area of these scooters? during the pilot period is it just the -- there was a limited footprint? >> at this point, the scooter share service areas are determined in a collaboration with both the scooter companies and the m.t.a. but in the future, we anticipate that if it's successful, we would want it to serve a much larger area in the city. >> so during the pilot it will stay the same? >> they're getting more scooters so we would increase the service area as well. >> it would be great to see the
west side better covered. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. and just to clarify before i think director has asks, the direct tive on the 15th it does increase the number of scooters. it will double the number of scooters for each company? >> they can access up to twice as many based on the conditions that are in place. before you ask more questions, director, i did say that i was i love data before i didn't want to answer your question about utilization without being exact. so in this time where public comment is happening, we've been able to confirm the utilization rates for scooters is about two to throw trips per day and otherwise it's four to five trips per day for bike. it's like that because there are a lot more bikes. it's hard, it's not really
apples to oranges yet but as we incree the number of scooters, hopeful low that number will also grow. >> thank you. more questions or comments? >> mostly i just wanted to comment that especially with the elimination of the electric bicycles from the system, one theme on my mind is the idea of system redundancy. my husband rides the electric bike to work everyday and actually stumped as to what to do to get to work now that they're gone. this might be one of those options. just commented it's clearly an affordable, clean, space efficient mobility option. i want to echo the comment there's a new constituency to push for protected bike lanes and more space for other users
of the road than the vehicles. that all i appreciate. it's interesting to hear so many people talk about the job creation opportunities. it's not an aspect of the scooter dialogue i've heard of to date. i don't believe we have an action. this is an informational item but i appreciate that the members of the public helping to tell some of that story of the scooters that i asked about before. >> so, it feels like we're on a path to really embrace this as potential for a lot of things including the last mile solution. has there been any conversation about prioritizing the infrastructure and the areas where it would be sort of where we can test that out. identifying areas where they might be most used as a last mile solution and say we'll put a lot of racks there and streamline the bike lanes? just to say let's see how this can work if we really want to promote it, right. >> you are talking about a
couple different forms of infrastructure but i know for the bicycle rack program, we have a proactive list. it does prioritize the sort of last-mile solutions. and servicing major trip areas like transit. >> what's the number few that the companies are saying that would be ideal. i've heard different things. >> the number of devices? >> the number of scooters? >> they have some idea of what they think. it's going to be a big number which means we have to make a lot of changes if we really get there, right. >> we haven't talked a lot about the total number of fleet for a city wide service that you are addressing. it would take a higher number than it is right now. one operator told me 5,000 to 10,000. it's a big change. i said i'm going to hold you to 5,000 for now. i think it's kind of the number
that people have in mind. >> thank you. do you have any questions or comments. i will just say, director it goes back to the test corridor that chair hine ke and he didn'd taxis but i'm sure he meant to say taxis as well. it sounds like that. we would create a test street to see sort of what the ideal situation is and in report as well and we see it in cycling and we have more male-identified psyche lists than female-identified psyche lists. i just want to echo the director. thank you so much to the people that talked about the jobs aspect. that was really valuable to hear and it's something that really should be on the front of our minds so i'm so glad you came and talked about it.
it's good to hear these companies are hiring people as full-time employees about benefits and with all of the things that come with being a person with a career path ahead of you. it's fantastic. thank you to the companies for that. a question, someone mentioned late-night workers. are either or both of these companies keeping their scooters out at night or do they take them in at night? >> one is starting to do more 24/7 and now that the shock in place an -->> i can see how youe company having those scooters out there for people who aren't working late at night and perhaps doing something else late at night might not be such a great option. so, i look forward to more scooters coming out and thank you so much for the work you've done in this.
you've been in an interesting position just charting a bath on this anpath onthis and your staa good job with this. had these things launched with no over tight, it would have collapsed and it would have been chaos so this measured launch has been really effective and i look forward to it continuing. we'll add scooters and we have to train ourselves to refer to them as scooter and bick lanes instead of just bike lanes. we will move on if i have no more questions. >> 12. transportation code division 2 to mot fie bike share permits require the station bikes have lock two devices and standard certification to require the certain percent of each permit consist of electric bicycles, days interest buying and row balancing requirements that rules are consistent with state and local laws and any guidelines adjusting the permit
fee schedule and requiring applicants provide sample bicycles. >> welcome. >> thank you. good afternoon, directors. i'm jamie bartz and i oversee the livable streets of m.t.a. overseas bicycle and pedestrian programs. i have been working on station less bicycle shares since the beginning which is about two years ago. two years ago i came to talk about the bike share and in the intervening two years there's been a lot of learning on bow half of m.t.a. staff as well as the industry and the bike share systems have evolved and i'm excited after two years of hard work, what we're presenting today really sets the stage for station less bike sharing in san francisco to move into a permanent part of our transportation system.
so, in october 2018, we came to the m.t.a. board to present an informational item on the results of the mid pilot evaluation for jump. i'm not going to rehash the evaluation results today. other than to say is that what we found is the demand for station less bikes is high and station less bike share compliments the station-based bike share systems we have. and over all the jump program is running smoothly. so what we are presenting today is a set of division two amendment that's would further strengthen the safety equity and accountable associated with the program. and if approved, the amendments that you are hearing today would allow the m.t.a. to open a new application process for bike share and i'll talk more about that at the end. just a small amount of context. right now we're operating a
18-month station less bike share program that started in january of 2018. the pilot operator is jump which operates station less ebikes. we talked about that with that. jump has a permit up to 500 bicycles in san francisco and an additional 50. which is over seen by a different agency. the remainder of my presentation will go over several of our key findings from the pilot programs and explain how we're proposing to a end in the transportation codes to reflect the lessons learned and create a better program. so, first, the biggest lesson we learned similar to the scooter roll out is the locking mechanism really works. this was something that we
liked. i'm happy it's working very well and so what we would be doing is through this amendment is amending the code to make it a requirement for any teacher of permits and in addition, was referenced previously one of the outcomes of the requirements that the bike lock-two something is we'll have an increase in demand so the transportation does provide a charge permities a feet for bicycle racks. we've also learned a fair amount about the importance of equity distributing the bikes and the transportation code amendment before you would revoic revise e to make it more affordable and a louse to us push the bikes to our outer neighborhoods.
the current requirement is for 20% of the bikes to be in the regional planning agency m.t.c. to just community of concern and disadvantaged communities but because a lot of those disadvantaged communities are located in the core of san francisco, whether it's the tenderloin or soma it's hard to meet the 20% requirement without serving any extra neighborhoods so we're revising the distribution requirements to reflect towards a city wide program. we knew community engagement was important at the time we initiated the program but we've learned more and more about that. we continue to see how important effective community engagement is. one thing we did is to publish community engagement guidelines to be operators and it's something we want to do moving forward and making sure we're providing guidance and resources
on how to best engage with community partners. we've also learned a fair amount about the importance of products quality and hardware. and just making sure that any volkswagen that is operating on our streets meets our safety standards. the transportation code already a louse us to set specific standards around testing of the bicycles and we have required lab tests for any bike share related to various consumer safety standards and we have the transportation code to require that at least two bikes be provided for inspection pressure to use and this would also carry over into any future generations of bikes we've seen that the industry is and they need to review each product in turn rather just the beginning of the permit. data sharing has been an area where we have learned a lot
about how, not me personally because i still don't know how an a. t.i. works but how to collect a real time data feed from operators and make it work. we've worked with some of our city partners around the county to come up with a mobility data specification or m.d.s. and we are requiring that from all of our operators. currently, scoots, skip and jump are all in compliance with the "the da vinci code" requirement and we've learned that setting up the data feed and testing it in advance of the permit is really important and we went through a lot of back and fourth to get that working and we'd like to get it work ong the first day so we have the ability to monitor the system as soon as it's running. in summary, we're applying a lot of lessons wove learned from the pilot around the lock-two design, bicycle distribution, community engagement and we
think it will revolve in a stronger program to equitable and accountable transportation system. if approved, we would open applications in the next few weeks and application review and permitting would occur in advance of july 2019 as a rewinder, the 18-month pilot ends on july 9th, 2019 so we want to move through the application review ex permitting process so there's no lapse in service should we decide to issue additional permits. finally, as i mentioned at the beginning, just very excited we're moving beyond the pilot stage and have a set of regulations that ensures the bicycle share grows and compliments the station-based bicycle share system and other forms of mobility in san francisco. thank you. >> thank you, very much. directors, do i have any questions before we go to public
comment? >> >> i've heard this is compliment tree tcomplimentary, can you jut unpack what you mean by complimentary? how did that manifest? >> absolutely. i think space and space bike share is here to stay. around transit stations we need a what to organize the bicycles that collect and the stations are the best way of doing that. and we've heard very clearly from lyft, the current owner of ford go bike that stations are a major part of their future plans. not only from organizing bikes but also the potential in the future to use stations for electric vehicles charging infrastructure. so one of the challenging aspects of that operating electric vehicles in the right-of-way now is how do you charge them and if they're
charging infrastructure in the right of ways through a station that would greatly simplify the operations and make it more economical to expand. we definitely see station-based bike shares as being a important part of where bike shares go in san francisco. >> ok. in terms of the types of trips, distances, locations, are there any comparisons to draw that are interesting to know about? >> in terms of the type of trips and locations, one thing about station less is it does allow you to serve lower density neighborhoods. there may be neighborhoods, whether it's a top of a hill or out of the way, that really doesn't make sense to invest in a full station with 20 documents. but that it's very important that someone has the option there's. and so we've seen that with some bicycles there have been at least some trips to every corner of the city and there were some happens of jump trips we published in our evaluation. there's been someone riding a jump bike on more or less every block of every street in san
francisco and i think the station less model allows for that universal access and the station-based model is really much better suited for a high number of trips in denser areas. >> you see the most sort of robust mobility is having both of them because they serve different strengths and benefits? >> great. >> absolutely. >> and then similar to the scooter data, do we know when it comes to jump, electric bicycle share, what people are using this instead of what they would have been doing otherwise or is it too early to have that data available? >> so, in parallel to the user survey we did of scoot and skip, we did collect a jump user survey at the same time. the full evaluation of that pilot will be done before the end of this at the 18-month mark. but over all the results were pretty similar across the three
operators. >> a similar percentage of the trip. replacing vehicle trips. >> yes. we can pull this specific data. it would just be the pilot valuation for scooters went online this morning and it includes the entire user survey so they're 40 or 50 bar graphs about everything we found. >> this is not exactly regarding the jump piece but you talked about getting a sample of the bike and testing and safety specifications so i just wonder if we have any early refluxes on how the break issue with electric bikes got through that system and if that system needs to be strengthened at all so it doesn't happen in the future. >> i mean, i think we're doing everything we can to look at the relevant consumer product safety center and we row lio row rely e operators. while it's disappointing to see
the bikes off the street i'm very happy that they proactively did that. so part of it is our review and part is going to rely on the operators because they're the ones that are doing the maintenance and to see things on an ongoing basis. >> does the code change samples of the bikes it's a new change and it wasn't our system in the past. >> in the past we did not require two sample bikes. we did require the bike meet federal regulations consume you are product safety standards and industry standard organizations around the city bikes. so we have done lab testing but we haven't inspected the bikes on our own and it's something we would like to do going forward. >> thank you. just to touch on that one, the recent problems with the lyft bicycles being take not out for
the breaks and the jump bicycles were taken out for a similar issue last year, do we anticipate going forward or is there language going forward that the public and the m.t.a. would be notified sort of as soon as the company knows there's an issue like that? i feel like this recent one, lyft was handled well. i'm a bike user and i don't think i was in town with the jump bicycle happened. i'm not sure everyone knew what happened. they just sort of handled it on their own without scooping in the city in their notifications. do we think it's a problem and are we going to address that going forward so that all the users will know at the same time? >> currently, the transportation code does require that they submit a maintenance plan to us. and it's something the specifics of what we required in that. we can look at ways to strengthen that. we do require a specific
maintenance plan as well as the detailed log of all the maintenance activities the companies do. we are trying to proactively check that and we can look at ways we can strengthen the requirement because i understand the showers that you are raising. >> good. thank you. shall we go to public comment or do i have any questions? thank you. let's go to public comment. >> thank you. damian suit followed by karen skinner and stacey randecker. those are the first three speakers. >> good afternoon,. >> i am a bike mechanic and field mechanic for motivate build bike. what i do on a day to day basis is --
>> as you also know, so i just want to say, we believe in doing the right thing is always the right thing, so consumer safety is always at the top of that list, so i would like you guys to keep that in mind. thank you for your time and for supporting union labour endeavour bike share program now and for the respect for the future. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon, i want to reiterate what rita was saying, and support of lift and motivate
and three words, basically, safety, attractiveness, and responsibility, and i will keep it like that. >> thank you very much. thank you for coming down. next speaker, please. >> hello. so much to say and so little time. i came here for the bike share and i am a fan of the scooters as well, anything that gets us around in a lighter and safer fashion that is not a car. i find it really difficult to hear about going to the hospitals and asking everyone of them about the scooter injuries when you are not doing the same for cars. cars are the ones that kill the people, they're the ones that hits them, they're they are the ones that cause the pollution, it is shortening life. they are the ones that are causing climate change, that is changing the world as we know it please immediately remove all
tax, suspend pilots, and anything else that resembles the sealed medallion program that is plaguing taxi drivers. our supervisors have declared a climate emergency. transportation has been the number 1 contributor to climate change. you are the people in charge of transportation for the city. the city has an active and environmentally focused population. we enjoy some of the most likable weather in the world. the only issue is that we have a lot of hills. ike share enables more people to have access to cycling and ideally live car free and travel carbon free. please prejump, and when they are ready, and any other worried -- where the vendors to provide share so that we may move through this world in a lighter and safer fashion. if you are looking for bike lanes, i know where to find them they're underneath the street parking that lines every street
in this town. you have to end it. you have to start removing it and find a bike lane some more of us can travel safely through the city carbon free. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> let's try this again. the san francisco bike rental industry send you all a letter regarding your concerns for bike share expansion, both stationed and station less. we are all locally owned companies. we seek a noncompetitive coexistence with bike shara -- bike sharing. it is difficult to follow the public comments of how much people love the sharing programs , however ours is a new issue. we're not against bike share, so we are seeking you, the m.t.a. board, and dressed -- and the director to formalize the distinction between bike share and bike rental.
now is the time with the m.t.a. drafting the expansion permit for july. complemented station bike share and scooter complements them both. all are for short trips and to subsidize transportation in the same way, we serve another market, the long trip recreation and tourist market, and have been serving it for over 30 years. they owns -- they own motivate and provide station bike share. uber owns jump. the station less model. if bike share expands without regulation to protect us, locally owned bike rental companies, they will absorb our customer base. it is easy to differentiate us, we laid it all out in our letter and would ask that you truly pay attention to the solutions that we provided. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please.
just owner of blazing saddles. the san francisco bike rental industry includes many long-term multigenerational family businesses providing hundreds of jobs with livable wages and benefits. our customers are almost exclusively using our bikes for recreation purposes longer than one hour. in 2011, before the bay area bike share pilot was rolled out, we begin a dialogue streets departments. our concern was to differentiate to the public bike share designed primarily for short distances to supplement public transit and bike rental primarily for recreation usage. after several years working with the city ministration, the m.t.a. and motivate, we have been unable to reach any formal
agreement differentiate share and bike rental. we are concerned the conflict of interest created due to the profit sharing agreement the city has discourages any agreement with the bike rental industry quick although we happen unable to reach any formal agreement with the m.t.a. , we have informally agreed that generally bike share is under one hour and bike rental is over one hour. we ask your help to encourage the m.t.a. and the director and his team to continue working with bike rental to reach a formal agreement safeguards allowing both industries to successfully coexist and thrive. without your support, the bike share industry will be decimated by these ridesharing industries. one of my colleagues and competitors will now share some reasonable solutions to reach that goal. thank you for your consideration
>> thank you. next speaker. >> thank you. thank you for the opportunity to air these issues. is very much appreciated. may have sounded, i hope it doesn't sound, this is really my key point. i hope it doesn't sound like the point that jean and jeff just made our for the effects of being protracted -- protectionist deck, yes, that is important, yes, i would love to see business, however, waving was important is the bike rental , and this is really true, actually, and i have had meetings yesterday 12 office, i have spoken with adrian many times over the last for years about this issue, and the key is this. the bike rental industry is actually part of the solution. why is that? one thing that hasn't been mentioned today is a golden gate bridge. it turns out that this is the
most attractive bicycle rental market in the country, if not the world. every single day, 1-5,000 bikes head over the bridge where there is a huge issue. what we are asking for actually helps this issue of availability and accessibility we have heard so much about. how does it do that? it should be obvious. right now, actually they have a pricing policy which just incentivizes people for using the bikes were more than one hour. we would like to see that extended to the station this program as well. yesterday i rode down to city hall to speak with paul. i couldn't find any uber or jump bicycles. what we are asking for is to extend that pricing policy to the station less models that will make sure that the bikes continue to be available, otherwise 1-5,000, you have a particular number that you want to see, right? without instituting the pricing
policy that we hope to see, those bikes are going to go to tourists. they will go over every day and they will stay there all day, so that will remove them from circulation. so we are also suggesting what is part of the solution and not part of the problem. >> thank you so much. next speaker, please. >> are there any other people for public comment, please please come forward, sir. >> thank you so much. my name is devon brady, i am a resident of the mission and i rely on bike share as my primary mode of transportation. i'm glad that they did and that
they took proactive steps to notify the public i am disappointed that you did not do the same. we need more options for bike share in the city. we shouldn't be just locked into two vendors. it is not like we live in cadillac revoked -- volkswagen and only 500 parking permits and those are the only car brands we allow in san francisco. we are holding these services to a really high safety standard and i think that is great, but i think we should also hold cars do the same high safety standard great now all the cars that we have put in on our street are able to exceed the legal speed limits. they can drive as fast as they can without getting caught sometimes, so i think, let's think about the safety problems that the bike share services have come across in the last few
days, but keep them in the context of how dangerous cars are in the city. we have already had ten people die on our streets due to cars so far according to our latest statistics. let's think about these things in context. finally, bike share is taking cars off the streets. it is making more efficient use of our streets, and i think bike share is working for our city. like six -- let's expand with more operators and more bikes and i fully support the changes that the sfmta staff recommended earlier. thank you. >> thank you very much. much appreciated. anymore public comment. no, public comment is close. this is an action item directors , you have any questions or? >> yes, thank you. i'm interested about the question in distinguishing between short rides on longer rides. can you talk a little bit about whether that has been discussing as to whether we would jump to
do the same thing? >> yes. the distinction between bike rental and bike sharing has been discussed for several years, and the sfmta would agree that there is a distinction and we would like the bike share system to focus on the short-term rental and the bike rentals, it is more appropriate for longer-term, as the speaker is referenced, the sfmta was sent a letter and the author had several informal meetings. we are working one -- on a formal response to that letter and hope to find common ground with companies between bike share companies and bike rental companies, but we are working on that response. >> thank you. nothing? we did all received that letter, and i think it did bring up some interesting points of what the bike rental company has and of
course, it is the longer rentals there's so many different kinds of bikes. i know i see the tourist on the bridge. tourist bikes, tandem bikes, a lot of different opportunities and for larger groups, of course, it makes much more sense i'm glad we are looking at that because it would be a shame to see the bike rental companies seriously, seriously harmed by the bike share companies. so we have this in front of us, and i just want to touch on the commenter who asked that we immediately remove the caps in light of the fact that there are no electric assist go bikes right now, but what we're doing right now is, as you mentioned, you are getting ready with the permit language and the permit process so that that will be available shortly, companies will start to bring their permits in and you will be able to review them so that when the july timeline comes around, we will be ready to act should we
have other companies that meets the permit requirements, should we be increasing the number of permits for jump that is out there or four lyft, if they will be putting permits as well. >> absolutely, that is the timeline. we will be getting the application online in the next two weeks. >> i think it makes sense to stick to that timeline and i know it has been so disruptive for other people not to have the electric assist available right now, but hopefully they will sort that out and we will stick to the timeline. i will say again, just with the scooters, the oversight of the m.t.a. and the work of your department has helped make this a much smoother process than it otherwise could have been or would have been the question of
labor harmony, is that -- i honesty can't remember, is it something in our permit? is it in the permitting? >> i didn't highlight it in the presentation, but there is a change to the transportation code that would require a labor harmony plan, is also as eliminating labor disruptions, and it consists with what we've already done in the commuter program and for the scooter program as well. >> great. that is good to hear. i have no other questions. absolutely. >> i have questions on the action in front of us. the language is very clear except for this clause, among other things, and then it lists all the things that we are adapting. can you clarify what you mean by
"among." >> it is a recommendation at the very end of the staff. >> i don't see a page number. >> the other things are very minor. if you go through the appendix, there are things that we are going through and changing sir her to the director, and all places, i think bike to bicycle, i think there are very minor changes that we didn't want to lift because we wanted to make sure other people knew what those things were as well. >> those are the substantive changes. >> thank you. >> all right. >> i am unclear, at present, amanda's husband can't get a bike. is that what you said earlier. >> they have taken all the electric bikes out of the system >> on one of the two systems. >> so are there electric bikes available in all -- in any part of the city right now?
>> jump is operating 500 electric bikes. ford go bikes is operating around 800 pedal only bikes, but they have to take in there electric bikes off to this -- off the street but there are still electric bikes available. >> so your husband would not be able to have access to a bike under these provisions? >> i defer to the director when the ford go bike electric bikes will be restored to the system. i don't know that. >> we don't know, i don't believe they know. we are communicating primarily through m.p.c. which has the contract which would motivate to operate and lift with operations to the status system, as you heard, they built their bikes on a safety concern. my guess is they're not going to come back really quickly, the current options are for bike
share and the nonelectric bikes, and jump we have is a permit for 500 bikes. >> under the current proposal before us, this will not accelerate the electric bikes coming into make the difference of what we lost? >> no, it will not. >> this will facilitate accessibility to more after july 1st? >> right. the ramp up time for us to get these changes in place to put out a call for a permit application to receive applications to review them, this is the lead time we need to our aim is to make sure we don't have any gaps so that we can issue permits in advance of july first. >> thank you. i got the message earlier from m.p.c. during the proceeding. they're rolling out 500 additional pedal only bikes to try and make up the gap as much
as possible, so we having to minimize the disruption as much as we can. >> thank you. i will have to get used to peddling under our own power up the hill again, i'm not looking forward to it but i will do it. directors, if i have no further comments or questions, is there a motion to approve? >> approved. >> any opposed? hearing none, this passes. thank you very much. moving on to item 13. [laughter]. >> thank you. miss boomer. >> you do have members of the public who you wish to address you on this matter. >> all right. do we have a staff presentation on this one? >> yes. >> good afternoon, directors. my name is casey and i'm a
senior planner with livable streets for the sfmta. here to you -- here today to talk to you about the battery connections project. i'm pitching for the project manager who is out sick today, he is very sad he couldn't be here. the connections project is a partnership between the porter of san francisco and the sfmta, as well as district three supervisor aaron peskin's office who is funding this project through the neighborhood transportation improvement program from the t.a. it is an outgrowth of ongoing conversations with the port around improving safety along the waterfront, particularly the embarcadero, which came into sharp relief last summer when there was a reckless fatal hit and run of the petty cap operator at this particular intersection here.
and it is a direct response trying to improve safety at this particular intersection as well as the adjacent and pop -- problematic battery in the intersection, but then through ongoing conversations with them, we are really trying to create a connected bikeway parallel to the embarcadero to both address these particular intersections as well as increase the baseline of the structure that is in the neighborhood. if i can move this slide... >> i'm not sure what is going on here.
>> technical difficulties. >> it always happens. >> to make sure we're talking about here, this map shows where there is porridge jurisdiction unless you shift -- up to the sfmta jurisdiction. the twaddle intersections and battery are within the port jurisdiction and we are looking at making more substantive changes to those intersections. what is in front of the board today are just class two bike lanes on battery and sansom in m.t.a. jurisdiction. they are a one-way street, two lanes in each direction, as well as vallejo street and davis, which are one lane in each direction, more local streets, and the idea is to improve conductivity within the neighborhood, which is separated from the waterfront, and the topography of telegraph hill from downtown. as well as trying to take some pressure off of the embarcadero
as we look for more substantive infrastructure. i'm also managing the embarcadero hanson project, which is aiming to add a protected to wait bikeway on the waterside. that project will take some time really the intent is to get onto the ground improvements in the area both on the embarcadero at the sight of the hit and run, and within the neighborhood. so over the past four to six months, we have quickly tried to do robust outreach to the neighborhood. we have had held four community meetings, we had a mailer to a large project area which was followed by a well attended walking tour of the area in the project site, and it really, we learned a lot through the outreach in terms of not just hearing folks and their concerns or suggestions, but also seeing out there this image that shows
skip, scoot, jump, this area is heavily, has a lot of employees from creative companies that really utilize transit in the last mile connection, so again, just trying to present a baseline infrastructure for them to utilize that and to stay off the sidewalk in the area as we build towards more complex solutions along the waterfront. the interest of time, i want to point out that a lot of the streets were implement -- we are implement in these bike lanes by narrowing the existing wide travel lanes, there are very few trade-offs associated with these bike lanes. the only additional action in front of you today is a parking space at the intersection of davis and broadway, which could become a sidewalk arm about in the future just across the street from a car free hotel that is going under construction soon, and we hope if this is
approved, we will be hitting the ground as early as next month, implementing these, and this goes for the same that is in the ports jurisdiction. while they are more complex, this is a light touch project looking at restrictions and adding plastic posts and bollards. we are continuing to work with the bonds that changes within their jurisdiction, and we are sharing all the comments we have received over the past many weeks and months with the port, but again, the action in front of the board is to approve the claims and a single parking space for daylighting to complement the improvements we are seeking in the jurisdiction. >> thank you very much. that was a very quick presentation, much appreciated. are there any questions before we go to public comment? >> just in light of the recent fatality that was on a striped bike lane that was unprotected, i always have to ask the
question if we are looking at an opportunity to put a bicycle facility, why are we not looking at creating protective icicle lanes in this project? >> we are certainly looking at protected infrastructure for the embarcadero which is on the high injury network. related corridors are not on the high injury network. it comes down to, this does not preclude protection in the future and we really set out in the beginning to provide a quick project, and quick protections do not always go hand-in-hand, so we certainly have looked at that. our document does look at a protected bike lane on sampson, but in the interest of time, we decided to move very quickly and establish a baseline infrastructure for this neighborhood to then perhaps have a conversation about what it could be in the near future. >> would it be significantly more costly to put in a couple
of poster create a protective facility on the street? >> in terms of the infrastructure, given that battery and sampson are one-way each direction, we would probably not be looking at major signal infrastructure. i think it really is about staffing capacity and resources in terms of time, as well as the outreach that would be needed to gain some level of support for those larger changes. >> i read and you answered in the staff report preemptively this question of why you are not pursuing protections at this time. i want to continue to challenge the assumption that has to take more time and it has to be more expensive and require more public outreach as compared to another bicycle facility. >> i hear your comments. we certainly have an interest to continue a conversation with the neighborhood and stakeholders,
but there are some significant trade-offs. it would have to be made and i think there is a good indication at the level of concern and comments that were raised around relatively modest changes at the intersections of the embarcadero we made a decision to get to a higher baseline level of infrastructure, and then to have that conversation, i think we would still be here talking about more outreach versus implementation if we were to move towards a protective facility. i fully understand and appreciate the need and desire for more construction throughout the city especially given the recent events, but this is what we set out to. we committed to this out front and we're delivering on this promise. >> director? >> i appreciate those comments as well. i want to add on that i read the staff report and i understand the timeline. i just hope that we can quickly transition from these quick improvements to, it looks like there's plenty of parking to be removed in the neighborhood that
we could implement quick changes that would provide protection here, but wouldn't be concrete, and i understand that it is a tough community outreach ask, but given the concerns of safety , i think it is one we should be pursuing as quickly as possible. >> thank you. >> i would add that we do have -- the proposal in front of the board for the first block of the battery bike lane as is a class four protected lakeway, as a proof of concept for what could happen, so we certainly did not ignore that. it was a decision we made to move quickly right now. >> thank you. i do appreciate your standing in for somebody else. it is good to hear from this board that level of support to support this project as it is in front of us and get these quick safety improvements on the ground and then keep moving forward. to your point, there will be a protected bike lane, but this will be a good release valve to take some of that bike traffic
off the embarcadero, and then continue to work on this because i do agree with you that we need to keep pursuing protected bike lanes and all of these quarters, but this is a good first step, and then we will look forward as we do to the next steps on this. public comment? >> johann followed by philip, and then kevin who is the last person to submit a speaker card. >> good afternoon, i am bill hannan. i live at the gateway, a large residential complex at jackson and davis street and surrounding blocks, and we are concerned about the proposal, just one small aspect of this item 13, a set of proposals. we are concerned about safety regarding the southbound traffic lane on davis between broadway and jackson. we are concerned about a
spillover effect into davis quarry. we think bicyclists southbound on davis will not stop when they come to jackson. they will proceed straight ahead into and through davis court and out to the far side, and davis court is a you for safety purposes. it serves as a pedestrian walkway, it is a parking lot for service trucks and moving vans, and it is an outlet for a very large parking garage serving hundreds of gateway residents. we think that that spillover effect will create chaos there and for that reason, we ask you not to approve the southbound proposed bike lane on davis between battery and jackson. we want to thank m.t.a. for giving us a terrific public outreach presentation