first 20, 23 regular meeting of the municipal transportation agency board of directors and parking authority commission. good afternoon, directors, staff, members of the public. if we could please find our seats. we thank you for joining us. this meeting is being held in hybrid format, occurring in person at city hall, room 400 broadcast live on govtv and by phone. the phone number to use. is (415) 655-0001. access. code 26612592554. when the item is called dial star three to enter the queue, commenters will have up to two minutes to provide comment unless otherwise noted by the chair. please speak clearly and sure you're in a quiet location and turn off any tvs or computers around you. also note that a time limit of ten minutes of remote public comment on each action or discussion item has been set. and notice for this meeting, we thank you for your cooperation in places you on item number two

roll call director heminger here heminger present director henderson here. henderson. present director hinsey present. kinsey present chair eakin here eakin. present. we are expecting director. so and kahina for the record, i note that director hinsey is attending this meeting remotely. director hinsey is reminded that she must appear on camera throughout the meeting and in order to speak or vote on any items pleases you. on item number three, the ringing and use of cell phones and similar sound producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting, the chair may order the removal from the meeting room of any person responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone or other or other similar sound producing electronic devices, places you on. item number four, the approval of minutes for the november seven regular meeting directors. there is one correction i'd like to make to page three under item 10.2. the minutes state that item 10.1 a was removed from the consent calendar and that should instead read that item. 10.2 a was removed not 10.1 a thank you.

thank you for that change. directors, are there any other changes to the november 7th minutes? seeing none, i'll open public comment for anyone attending the meeting in person on the november 7th minutes and seeing none. please open a remote at this time. we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. no speakers. okay, we'll close public comment is there a motion and a second? please move as amended. seconded by our secretary. yes. thank you. please call the roll on the motion to approve the minutes with correction director heminger heminger director henderson. henderson. i director hinsey. hi hinsey. i jeremy corbyn. hi, egan. i thank you. the minutes are approved and places you on. item number five communications. i have none. moving on to item number six introduction of new or unfinished business by board members. okay director

hemminger, please. thank you, madam chair. colleagues you may have seen in the papers as i did that according to one report, at least at this agency is owed $200 million in unpaid parking revenue, which is a lot of dough . it's about a year's worth of fare revenue pre-pandemic. and i know you can't treat all of that. $200 million in one lump, but i think it would be helpful for the staff to develop some kind of recovery plan. so that we could repatriate as much of that money. what for what it's intended for, which is to help subsidize our immune system, among other things. and i think it would be important. apparently the newspaper report only went back a few years to go back as far as we can recover the revenue and also to look at

other sources of revenue that we may be owed. and i think it would be a healthy exercise to include those numbers as well. they probably won't approach the level for parking fines and fees, but every little bit helps. so that would be my request for that plan to be developed and for it to be presented to this board as soon as we can muster the effort. thank you. director hemminger director tomlin, is there anything you want to say about that right now? no. we'll be happy to have staff put together either a memo or a presentation, whichever is the board's pleasure. thank you. any other items of new or unfinished business? okay. if no more. i do have one item which was noticed on our agenda, and this is just to let you all know, colleagues, members of the public, that as we have noticed, the board will

be sunsetting remote public comment effective january 1st, 2024. this change is at the direction of the mayor's office for all boards and commissions citywide. it's intended to ensure a uniform public comment policy. consistent with that which has been adopted by the board of supervisors. it is also intended to avoid the type of disruptive issues that gave rise to the board of supervisors policy in the first place. i know for the community that loves to comment at these meetings and i know some of you will not be happy with this decision. so i just want to remind you of all of the options available to you to share your opinion with the board. you may always write your comment in advance of the meeting and i will encourage the further in advance of the meeting, the more guarantee that the board will see the comment in advance of the meeting. this board is very committed to reading the public comment letters that we receive. so that is a very effective way to get your opinion across. i believe secretary silva, members of the public can also call in

and leave a voicemail that will be transmitted to the board. so that's also an option that you have in advance of the meeting. you may, of course, continue to attend the board meeting in person in this room to provide public comment and i want to also let you all know that especially for those of you who will be desiring to continue remote public comment, i as chair, i'm going to be exploring offering virtual office hours in advance of the meeting starting in january. so that's an opportunity additionally for you to share your views directly with me. we're still working out some of the logistical details, but that information will be posted online soon. and then finally, that accommodation for remote public comment will continue to be made available for those with disabilities needing accomp adoption and information about requesting that disability accommodation can be found on our agendas or by reaching out to the board. secretary, secretary silva. so we look forward to seeing everyone in person and continuing to hear from you colleagues. any comments or

questions on that item before i go to public comment. okay. please open. let's invite public comment from anyone in the room. i do have one speaker card. richard rothman. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is richard rothman and i just i don't think all commissioners are following this directive, but it's just really a discrimination against people, people who have mobility issues and seniors and people who live out in the in the district. and why can't this, you know, i've been following this commission for a very long time and why can't this commission have meetings in the neighborhood? three of the commissioners live in the richmond district. they could have it at the richmond rec center and or over in the sunset. you know, so especially like when we're talking about

the bus lines, the 28 and the 20, was it 28 and the 29 and gary, you know, they could have had public comment, public public meetings out in the neighborhood and have them at night. i can't see why staff can't come out to the richmond. maybe they'll know. they'll explore something new in the city they haven't seen before. so i really hope, you know, we can get this mayor's directive, but, you know, think of having an alternative. i like the idea of having virtual meetings, but maybe have the meetings out in the community and have the meetings at night. you know, a lot of people work out during the day or have child care and hard to come to the meetings. so maybe have options of having some kind of alternative meetings. thank you. thank you for your comment. are there other commenters in the room? go ahead, please. hello hello. my

name is chaya french. i live in san francisco and i'm the transit organizing director at senior and disability action. and yeah, i appreciate that. it sounds like this is not the position that you all might have chosen and that it's getting carried down from the board of supervisors. but i would ask you to use whatever you can in your power to give feedback to the board of supervisors that this is not a position that really works for this board. i don't think it really works for san francisco government in general. i think we i think some of the importance of remote public comment is in giving a public forum. so that all of us can hear what the community is thinking. and i appreciate the

what you just laid out, but that doesn't let the community know sort of what the conversation is and that we're particularly concerned because we are in partnership with many organizations and community members and communities like parents, working class people, all people who can't make it to parts of the city, people who might have of physical limitations, but yet don't want to identify themselves publicly as disabled, and that there are so many important things that come before this board. and we really want our whole community to be able to weigh in. thank you. thank you for your comment. next speaker, please. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is ty bash. i was actually wasn't going to give public comment, but since we're talking about this item, the ada

wheelchair accessible entrance on the east part of this building has been out of service for i don't know how long. eight months ago, i was in this building and i reached out to the individuals who are taking care of maintenance, and they promised me that this will be taken care of expeditiously. i was here today. it's still broken. not only that part of the original assembly removed the. the handrail, which means that in order to come in through security, people need to crawl down on all fours to go up the stairs and i don't think that's that's dignifying perhaps it's you could delay remote access until some of these things are fixed so people can come over to this building and actually provide public comment. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. hi. board members. luke

bornheimer. i will admit that i am very torn on this. this item and this change. as you all know, i organize a lot of people around car for jfk and great highway and slow streets to make comment and many of those people were able to engage because they were able to engage remotely, whether it was at night because they had a kid at home or just they had never engaged in the process at all. and people like me made it really easy for them to engage in the process. i also recognize that at many of the equity issues and access issues with remote public comment are the same with in-person comment. it's still hard for people to learn about meetings. it's still hard for them to engage. so i encourage you all the mayor's office to figure out ways that increase access, increase awareness for the public, and for people to engage in an equitable fashion. you know, someone mentioned the public comments that are sent in and

the ability for people or spoken for people to hear what other people are saying. and so i think something that could be really great is for all commissions in the city to be releasing public comments that are emailed so that anyone can see what is sent to a commission or a board without having to a sunshine request that would allow people i mean, that's just good governance. that's just good transparency for the public to see what's being said to boards and commissions. so yeah, very torn on this. obviously this is coming down from the top, from the mayor's office. so yeah, i don't know what the best solution is here, but certainly other cities, other countries have figured out solutions that are more equitable and increase access without you know, bogging down meetings and hours and hours of public comment that people like me organize. so thanks for your consideration. thank you. any other speakers in the room? okay if not, please open a remote. secretary silva. at this time, we'll move to remote public comment. not a

total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderator for speaker. hello, board members, i'm dylan papers, the community and policy manager at san francisco transit riders. we were disappointed to hear about the decision to end remote public comment. our remote public comment offers an accessible option for folks who are unable to attend each meeting in person, whether it be for disability reasons or child care reasons or work obligations, or just for the reason that i'm calling it today, which is i'm out of town but still want to be able to speak up publicly at these meetings. a lot of transit riders are are not necessarily able to take time out of their day to come down to city hall in person and remote public comment has given them a lot more opportunity to speak up about the things that impact them. we

know that public transit is going to be a big part of meeting a lot of our equity and climate goals in the city and it's crucial to hear from the people riding transit at sfmta board meetings, whether or not they're able to get there in person. it sounds like there is maybe some hesitancy from this board to implement this policy. so i hope you all can reconsider and push back on the mayor's office's request. i do really appreciate the idea of virtual office hours and hope we can see each board member adopt that practice as well. i think that could be a good way of getting more of that direct feedback from riders. thank you all for your consideration and i hope you can reconsider and push back on the policy. thank you. next speaker. herbert weiner. now i am living in assisted living. it prohibits me from attending the

meetings in person at and i think that the remote comment for me is precious. on the other hand, all means of access should be available for feedback back, especially at this time. the muni proclaims it has serious problems with providing services , so you need input from all sides in all ways. now now the reason why this prohibition has gone through is, is there's been hateful speech which we all abhor in our right minds simply cutting off the speaker is the way to do it that way. there is no problem. someone says something despicable. you would immediately discontinue him from speaking and you can do that by cutting off the microphone, phone and cutting off the remote

access to that party. it's as simple as that. so so i suggest you convey the sentiment to the mayor and also to the board of supervisors. thank you very much. thank you. next speaker. jerry cannon directors. my name is evan arabic and i'm the advocacy manager at walk san francisco, allowing remote public comment is an equity issue, but it is also a good governance issue for many san franciscans coming to city hall on a tuesday afternoon for potentially several hours is a tremendous challenge and often simply impossible. we have jobs, kids, transportation limitations and physical disabilities. allowing remote public comment means more people can at least have the chance to have their voice heard, and that can and that more can imagine juggling responsibility in such a way that they can contribute to the

discussion even without remote public comment, more people will be shut out of the conversation. and that's indisputable. that's not only concerning from an equity lens. it should be understood as a threat to good governance. when more voices are heard, decision making is better informed and therefore potentially more effective. the public needs us and our constituents and members of the vision zero coalition will continue to raise our voices through in-person public comment , sending in letters and also showing up to speak because lives are on the line. and this commission needs to hear from people. thank you. thank you. no additional callers. okay. we will close public comment. director hemminger, do you want to speak again on this? yes. just briefly, first of all, to compliment you, madam chair, for i kind of liked your your hybrid model for remote comment, so i'm going to be sorry to see it go. so secondly, i certainly want to endorse the idea of having all of our future meetings in the richmond district. but

seriously, on that point, i don't know whether this board has a history of taking the show on the road, but that is one way, i think, to interact with the community in a new fashion in it's a lot of work and i'm especially looking at our commission secretary, but i think from time to time that might be something we ought to consider doing. thank you. thank you. any other comments from my colleagues? okay dr. karina, i just wanted to double click on that. i think that would be a wonderful practice to have. i believe rec and park conducts their meetings in that way. they go to different rec and park sites and that's where they have they host some of their committee meetings. and so i think it's there's a precedent for it for sure. it is extra work for christine. and so i'm curious to see what that looks like. but i think that that would be a wonderful compromise to see how we can meet folks

where they're at for sure. great. so i'm just going to go ahead and read the numbers again. it's in the printed agenda, but if you want to call in and leave a voicemail or request accommodation, it's (415) 646-4470 or email mta board at sfmta.com. and i will say i'm also intrigued by the idea of having our meetings rotate around to different parts of the city. i recognize it's more work. director tomlin is glaring at me and the california transportation commission rotate their meetings all over the state of california to give exposure to different parts of the state. so i think it's something we should at least explore and look into you as well as i'm sympathetic to the comment about the time of this meeting at 1:00, and i know some other commissions change the times of their meetings. so these are all creative solutions and i thank members of the public for trying to think creatively about how we can adapt to this new guidance and still provide meaningful opportunity for public engagement and specifically remotely. let's move on to the

next item, please places you on item number seven, the director's report. thank you, christina and members of the board. my first item is bittersweet. i want to recognize sfmta government affairs director kate breen. upon the announcement of her retirement. but kate will be retiring from city government on december 19th. kate, do you want to come up while i flatter you about your extraordinary accomplishments. kate began i don't even know if this is the beginning of your transportation career, but no, i believe. no, no, no, no, no, no. but but kate, before joining the sfmta has spent 11 years at the metropolitan transportation commission where she was instrumental among many things in helping to ensure the passage of the intermodal surface

transport efficiency act of 1991, an. sounds like a long time ago after 11 years at mtc, she joined the sfmta, where she has been for 22 two years. that is dedicated in to public service and she has had really extraordinary accomplishments here. obviously, her accomplishments as none of them are a result of her alone in fact, one of the things that is so amazing about kate is the way she forms teams, including the extraordinary team, all of whom are here today, including some who have come back from leave just for this event. but kate has formed teams in order to accomplish all kinds of extraordinary legislation, everything from really your first accomplishment at the sfmta, which was helping to ensure funding for the central

subway project, in part by establish ing the groundbreaking principle that allowed san francisco's contribution local contribution on the surface component of the t third line to count as the local contribution for federal funding for the subway portion of that line. a principle that has been used again by the transbay joint powers authority for helping to fund the for the portal project. the downtown rail extension project. she is also helped get past that ab 101, which established the first trans it only lane enforcement demonstration program in the state and then got that continued something that we rely upon today in order to enforce our our transit lanes through cameras and she has, among other things, been for 12 years working very, very hard on vision zero policy at the state,

notably helping to pass ab 43 assembly member friedman's bill that gave san francisco the authority to lower speed limits. and really one of i mean, probably the crowning achievement, which is after 12 years of trying every single year at the state legislature, legislature helping to get past friedman's ab 645, which authorized finally speed safety cameras in california. she's also, in addition to leading here locally and at the regional level, she has helped to uplift her counterparts all over the state of california. she has been chair of the executive committee at the california transit association and was one of the key people who helped form the california city transportation initiative, which is a coalition of the eight largest cities in california. i am going to miss kate's wise

counsel and hard work dearly and the only consolation that we have upon her departure is the extra ordinary team that she has created who are ready to step up in order to ensure a seamless transition. kate, would you like to say anything? i mean, amazing . thank you, jeff, for those amazing kind words, each of those things that you cited were such battles of their own. and of course, none of these things are accomplished alone, as jeff mentioned. but also, if you look behind who was leading on those, it's san francisco legislators, right? assembly member david chiu, even when he was a supervisor for assemblywoman fiona ma, senator scott wiener, all of these have been champions and many before them. i just naming a couple and so the alignment and the commitment of our delegation over the years has really made all of these successes possible for this agency and for the city. and of course, congresswoman speaker

emerita nancy pelosi, who battled on the floor of the house to get the language that allowed that phase one, phase two match for the third street light rail to count towards the central subway. so all of that was amazing and fun. love it. love the work, love this agency, love my team. and i just want to acknowledge them here today on the local government affairs. chadwick lee, janet martinson and joel ramos for state, regional and federal katy angotti and monique webster. and on regulatory affairs, kathleen saecularis and kathy broussard. and i don't think i've had a chance for y'all to meet them. everybody is humble. everybody works their butt off, and we're all committed to the purpose and the goals of this agency. and so i just want to acknowledge and give them a round of applause as . so i think i really just want to make sure that i thank you as a board for giving me the opportunity. this board is one of the most consistently

professional and informed boards that this city has. and while it's changed in its purview from 2001, when i came here to work for muni and was living in the city, working for the city and seeing it for all it was and then this board has really evolved to be so comprehensive in the purview that you have leadership and authority over as it relates to the streets as well as muni. so thank you. i can keep talking. i'll talk to you guys individually at times, but just thank you again. and i read something. last thing i'll say is there isn't retirement anymore. there's retirement dates. and so this will be my first retirement. let's just say that and i look forward to continuing to engage in in public work. so and i believe we also have somebody here from the mayor's office who might want to offer some words. tom paulino, tom. thank you, director tomlin, chair ekin directors, madam city

attorney and madam clerk, my name is tom paulino. i am the liaison to the board of supervisors for mayor breed. i'm not going to expand beyond what director tomlin had already said about kate, but as a point of personal privilege. and one of the things i had the opportunity and privilege to meet kate in my capacity when i was district director for then assembly member david chiu and me getting up to speed on everything, no pun intended, related to the transit was made easy because of you. kate and i very much appreciate all of your insight and all of your guidance that you offered me and my team and the assembly member over the years. however, in my capacity today, and this is something that gives me a lot of joy and it is a great privilege to offer . these are not given out willy nilly. they are for the exceptional individuals or organizations in the city that contribute both in terms of public service and to their team and to our constituents wholesale. but this is a proclamation from mayor london and breed recognizing today, day

november 21st, 2023, as kate breen day in the city and county of san francisco. so. right i think okay yeah. okay. kate, i'll just i'll just note a lot of the accomplishments have been cited, but i'll just note that as i was reading through the materials, specifically the legislative program for next year under the vision zero section, we will continue to support efforts that are consistent with san francisco's vision zero action strategy, transformative policy agenda, which includes two policy objectives that have now been achieved. yes right. check, check. lower speed limits and speed safety camera

authorization. i just remember year after year, you coming to the board. we're going to get it done. we're going to get it done. and what a remarkable thing that you get to retire. now, having really checked off the box on our top legislative priority. i hope you just feel so proud of that and that maybe we can rename some of the speed safety camera infrastructure after you as well. i don't know if director hemminger you want to share any reflections from your time at mtc? i certainly would, and today would be the day i got to be chatty because i got a frog in my throat. so i apologize. know, kate was already at mtc when i got there, so god knows how long she had been working there before. and actually i had the job she has here at the mta at mtc. so from that first day she and i have been working together. that's true. and i'm glad that i was able to catch up with the tail end of her career here. as you were certainly ending with a bang and not a whimper. and they say you should always leave your

audience wanting more. and that's just what you've done with all of us, because we're used to success with you in charge. so professionally and personally, this is a this is a great day for me and you'll have plenty to keep you busy. you could even get appointed to a transit board. what do you know? so congratulate us. thank you. thank you very much, stephen. thank you. all right. can i. all right. moving along as perhaps some of you noticed last week was apec, which was a major event that involved all hands on deck effort by staff at the sfmta. we'll be providing a more detailed report back later on, but i have to say how incredibly proud i am of the agency staff for the job that they did, helping to make sure that san francisco kept moving and avoided catastrophe. all week,

many of my team worked 16 hour shifts every day. we had about a thousand volunteers working as ambassadors, standing out in the rain all day long, not only helping to provide directions to folks, but responding instant early to changes in bus routing that we had to do to deal with first amendment activity and other unexpected events that were kind of constantly occurring. in some ways, i feel like the staff response to apec was a culmination of much of the cultural change work that we've been doing over the last four years, including how we had to come together during covid. this is an amazing team in any emergency and we were fortunate that this emergency we actually had the opportunity to plan for in advance. i could not be prouder of the work that the team has done and i'm sure

christine will forward to you. a little quick video that i did in the field as i was running around on muni and my bike, seeing how things were working and checking in with my team and telling them just how proud i was of them. so more details on that later. i'm also next subject. glad to announce that in fact, last week on november 15th, the mtc commission did vote to support the staff recommendation for the allocation on of california state transportation agency funding for the sfmta. the total comes. to $309 million and we are incredibly grateful to the governor, to the state legislature and to the full mtc commission, along with its staff for making those recommendations . and now hopefully moving forward with allocating them. bree mcwhirter, our cfo, will be providing an update at our next meeting on what that means for

our budget. but one thing i can assure you is we still remained in the worst financial crisis of our agency's history. but this contribution buys us a significant amount of time to continue our work at solving the underlying structural problem. it also makes sure that we do not have to cut muni service next year, and we are incredibly grateful for that. next up, i wanted to provide an update also on our regional efforts. and this is on regional transit network management. at we as you know, have been working since the very beginning of covid to coordinate with all of the transit operators in the region. and since the beginning of covid, every monday morning at 9 a.m, the general managers of the larger agencies meet along with our staffs in order to coordinate efforts and also to help figure out how do we make the over all transportation system look like a single integrated system from a user

perspective? and how do we communicate our needs for dealing with the stuff at the edges where things are not as connected as they should be? so we have been working collaboratively only with staff. the metropolitan transportation commission, with several state legislators and all the operators on a whole variety of programs. and we're starting to really get some momentum now. so some of the key work from this year include a successful first year pilot of the clipper bay pass program. phase one, which provides unlimited transit use for our people at key institutions. phase one included academic institutions ans, like santa rosa college and san francisco state university collected a lot of data on that and now mtc is moving on to phase two, which will include food a employer pass that can be

made available to all employers in the region. this is a critical next step and something that may be a key component of our larger regional funding strategy for dealing with the fiscal cliff. we're also underway with a no cost and reduced cost interagency transfer pilot project, which caps the transfer penalty for folks who have to transfer, say, between muni and bart or between ac transit and bart or muni and samtrans so that people aren't penalized just because they happen to live on the other side of a county line. again, an effort to make the system work from a user perspective as if it were one single integrated system. we're also working collaboratively with all of the agencies and mtc on a regional wayfinding strategy that includes signage, whole wayfinding typology, system mapping and other characteristics so that again,

all of our collateral material looks like it's a part of one system. and finally, we're working together as two operators in order to make sure that we can ensure our and maintain ties, timed transfers at key transfer hubs among agencies. staff have done some extraordinary work on this topic, including making us all suddenly realize that one of the most critical elements of ensuring and maintaining time transfers is aligning the operator sign up schedules in our labor agreements because that is the time at which we adjust our schedules and it is limited because our people who work for our agencies need to actually be able to plan their lives and schedules for their kids. and we realize that our operator sign up schedules are perfectly misaligned, but it is relatively straightforward thing that we can do in order to underpin in an effort to ensure

and maintain time transfers. we are also working at the structural level in order to bring all the operators together in a more formal way. we have begun regular meetings of a new region panel, network management committee at mtc. mtc has hired melanie choi as the first regional network management director. because one of the things that we realized of course, is that if there's no staff in charge of making it happen, it is not going to happen. and in addition to that, each of the operators is offering seconded staff, dedicated time in order to work on these regional efforts in a coordinated way. the regional network management council, which i am a member of, will host its first meeting on tuesday, november 27th. this is a meeting of all of the large transit agency general managers, three small agency reps and the

mtc executive director. and at our first meeting we will discuss our year one work program focused on customer facing tanjil able outcomes in order to help not only make the system work, but also build trust with the electorate who we are reliant on for addressing our financial challenges. so i am very proud to have helped lead these efforts over the last couple of years and to see that they are finally bearing fruit and also grateful for yet again for our government affairs team, for their strong support in making all of this happen. and finally, i want to provide an update on valencia street, something that has been in the news a lot, and staff are working hard on. as you know, we are currently having a pilot program underway in order to achieve goals of advancing cyclist and pedestrian safety on valencia street and ensuring

that we maintain good emergency vehicle access and supporting small business success in a challenging economic time for san francisco. we have obviously heard a lot from pedestrian and cyclist advocates. we're also hearing a lot from small business owners and so we are continually making adjustments based upon what we hear in order to advance safety and in order to help the small businesses. so one of the things that we did early in the program is to make sure that the critical commercial loading functions that had been happening in the bike lane, that those functions could be accommodated at the curb and that effort was successful. however, many of the small business owners are concerned that we have been too successful with that goal and too much customer and employee parking has been removed in order to make that happen. so

the team has been making a lot of observations of the street and talking to small business owners and is working now at fine tuning the dials on the loading zones so that the hours of enforcement for the loading zones better match the need and that those loading zones can be converted into customer parking when they're not needed for loading. so the team is now working on a lot of changes and adjustments to the loading zone. signs the hours of enforcement eliminating some zones where they're clearly not needed in order to make sure again that we can optimize across all of these goals, particularly around safety and small business success. we're also working in order to make sure more people know about the hoff street and mission. bartlett garages as places where customers can park and will continue to make small adjustments while we do our larger and more formal evaluation that will be coming to you with in early 2024. and

that it is my director's report. thank you, colleagues. are there questions for director tumlin? okay okay. seeing none right now , let's open to public comment for anyone in the room on the director's report. and board members. luke bornheimer i'll keep my comments focused on valencia street. i am disappointed to see the agency investing more time and energy on the center bikeway design that has resulted in many more people crashing and being injured and may have also resulted in businesses getting less business. there is a mountain of data that shows that curbside protected bike lanes as well as pedestrianization of a street would greatly benefit

businesses if we were a visionary city with a mayor who had a vision, we would be installing one of those things and addressing the business needs. making the streets safer for people and helping our businesses recover. so i continue to be disappointed that the agency hasn't created a design for curbside protected bike lanes or pedestrianization. they've only created just simple mocks and as a result, agency staff have continued to tell the public that if the current center bikeway was removed that we would have to go back to paint only unprotected bike lanes, which of course nobody wants this. this lack of an alternative design leaves us in a really vulnerable situation where if something tragic happens, we have to remove the center bikeway and go back to what we all don't want to go back to. so i implore you to ask staff to urge staff to create designs, official designs, complete designs for those

options so that if we do need to remove the center bikeway, we have something to go to. and in case you didn't know, there is a design for curbside protected bike lanes between 19th and cesar chavez from 2020, it is a complete design, including dutch style protected intersections. so the only part that needs to be designed is between 15th and 19th. thank you so much. thank you. any other speakers in the room? okay. please open a remote at this time. we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderator first speaker . hello. good afternoon. chair aitken and mta board members. this is my open message to kate. i worked in government affairs also and although i could not physically be there today, i didn't want to miss the opportunity to congratulate kate you on your amazing career achievements as mta government affairs director. thank you for

always providing and promoting great leadership, communication, inclusiveness, integrity, mentorship, excellence and teamwork. i've never been so honored to work with such an amazing group of people, and it's due to your effortless leadership and integrity. i've learned from you. you don't have to be great to start, but you have to start to be great. thank you for your grit, grind and greatness. thank you for always allowing all of our voices to be heard and most importantly, i will miss knocking on your window even when you're on a meeting and you still turn it around with a big smile and waving at me. thank you, kate. enjoy your new journey and job well done. i miss you. and big hugs. i'll miss you. and thank you. you left us well, thank you. thank you. next speaker. hello good afternoon. this is barry toronto. i want to congratulate kate green on her

first retirement. and i wish her luck in her her next next endeavors before she retires again. i just i think she's accomplished a lot. too bad she she wasn't able to get the legislature to allow the city to regulate tax or to have some control over them. the next topic is apec. apec was a disaster for cab drivers. there were a lot of at night and couldn't access the union square transit lanes. i will address that more during my regular public comment and we didn't. we didn't we did horribly except for the two days after the conference when the security personnel all used taxis to head back to washington, dc, so that was extremely helpful. some of the hotels, except that having access to them were blocked. the cab vans were blocked in some cases. so hopefully for the

christmas holiday season we can work something out and also finally and not least about the valencia street. it'd be great if you took away the center lane. i've had to go in there several times late at night due to the blockage by garbage trucks and garbage trucks need to do their job. but we also need to do our job as well. and encountering a garbage truck in the middle of the block is can be a problem at times. thank you very much. thank you know additional callers. okay. thank you. unless there are comments from my colleagues on the director's report we can move on places you on item number eight. the citizens advisory council report. we actually have no report for that. council places you on item number nine. general public comment members of the public are may address the board of directors on matters that are within the board's jurisdiction and are not on today's calendar.

we did receive a request. for language services today for spanish and brazilian portuguese interpretation. and let's start with spanish interpretation for any members of the public requesting spanish interpretation, please come to the podium to provide comment at this time. okay and if i can have my spanish translator, please make their way to the mic . and then after this group, we will move to brazilian portuguese translation so spanish first. okay, maybe the translator can make that announcement in spanish. yes. can you. buenos tardes. para las personas su comentario publico en espanol, por favor. pongase en linea para presentar lo. yeah, it's just better if there's an actual translator. go ahead. okay hola. buenas tardes.

yo, soy el, senor vicente mejia. estoy partido en la in winston cuatro veinte tengo tres anos de estar para cada el motivo de sa partido no alcanzo para pagar una renta. he. con en vivo con mi hijo se llama el camino también la réunion el se llama. nathan stanley mejia dos anos el trabajo de también uber entonces espero ustedes. algun parker

para nosotros para toda la comunidad e porque si mucho accidentes e tocar la puerta asi como un maiz como messi medio en el carro el medio de los carros ryan he knows no sé como a la en la noche media todo eso he. la habia si and habias cosa ozone depletion de agua cosas asi es por eso el motivo nosotros estamos aqui espero para todos los estamos i un un un poco especial para nosotros si. eso son mes mis preguntas ustedes para ver si pueden por un par

cuyo para si es esto. okay. gracias. hello. good afternoon. my name is walter vicente mejia, and i am part at winstone for 20 and i've been part there for three years. the reason is that i don't have the money to pay a rent. i lived there with my son. my son is coming here. his name is nathan stanley mejia. he is 22 years old. he works as a dishwasher. and i work for uber. and i hope that we can find parking for the whole community because there's many accidents there. and they come late at night knocking at your door about a month and a half or two months ago, there was an

accident and my glass, my window was broken. that happened around 11, 1130 at night. and there is many arabs that are throwing there's like water explosions and that's why i'm here today, because i hope that we can find some kind of special parking for us. so that's why i'm here, to see if you can do that for us. we call the next speaker. please okay. okay. if we could then move to brazilian portuguese interpretation. if i could have my interpreter please come up and make an announcement. i gotta speak fazer algum comentario in portuguese. podem ver até aqui.

um ola todos e presidentes. meu nome cayo el morro winston drive mas o menos un mundo emilio moro sozinho como eu no tengo conditions de dakar con el eu un poco pasado para mi yo no conseguiu motorhome para mi no fecha de rua ali eu tenho un poco de dignidade para para mi sobrevivir con icu morando ali mas despesas he sobrevivir muito bem ella temos uma boa vicinanza nos mesmo nos temos um problema a relacionado a alguns coisa do shiloh nos dice ali peso de

orszagos diretas do transito de san francisco de nos de tempo para possamos conseguir un lugar permanent para fechar arms e si nos podemos contar com auxilio da cidade para nos ajudar essa solucao serra de grande de ajuda para para todos nos agradezco a oportunidade e o tempo de voces obrigado. hello my name is kyle. i live on mission drive. i've been there for about a year and a half. i live alone and i don't have the means to pay for rent all by myself. that's why i got a motor home where i can have some dignity. and then in that way, i can. i'm able to pay all

of my bills and have an okay life. we have good neighbors there. we are not the type of people that get in trouble. we don't have any problems. so i'm asking i'm here to ask for the board to give us more time to find a solution, to get another place to live, a better place. so i'm asking for the city also to maybe help us in any way possible. i would like to thank you. next speaker. bravissimo. ola my name is leandro luis. your model aqui. now, winston, drive in home. one email my manos komminsk rosa della kelly. nice vamos in know-so motor home

por qué no tenemos condiciones de pagar el costo elevado he y sentimos seguros en mi esposa puede ser una volta a noite do trabalho in seguranca e eu posso preocupado por necessidade nos necesitamos podemos ajuda porque si vamos um tenemos para nos sabemos fazer para a de la no sabe vamos fazer por estamos aqui ajuda nos estamos porque precisamos realmente no estamos apartamento uma casa porque no tenemos realmente condiciones. okay obrigado. good afternoon. my name is leandro lewis. i live

in on winston drive at a motor home. i've been there for about a year and a half with my wife kelly. we are living there. we're living in this motor home because we don't have the means to pay for rent, especially because rents are very high now, now and so we are we feel safe there. i feel safe with my wife there. she can go out in the morning and come back in the evening, even when it's dark and i feel safe about that. so we are there because we don't have another place to go. we would love to be able to rent an apartment and everything, but we just don't have the means to do that. and so we don't know what to do. we are if we're asked to move out, we don't know where to go. we don't have a place to go and we don't know what to do. that's why i'm asking for help. thank you. thank you. additional

speakers requiring interpretation. requesting interpretation. myself interpretation. madam president. so calzado no avail. i'm exposed. you as it more temos on songy on e the concern was poorer. you see sad you know tem para e fazer e foresight la no tem protege see. good afternoon. my name is person. i am married.

i live in an rv with my wife and children and we live there because we don't have means to pay rent. our income is very low and we just don't have another place to go if we're asked to move out, we won't know what to do. we just don't have another place to go. that's it. thank you. additional speakers. they might as well. preciso de interpretacao. seeing seeing none. our interpreters will stay through this item if we require if there are any additional members of the public who want to speak, i can move to then our speaker cards. i have speaker cards for flo kelly and richard rothman. you can approach the podium now and then we can perhaps start with the line that's forming on the side. after that. good afternoon

again. my name is richard rothman. i live in the outer richmond. or as your staff likes to call it, the county. you can ask them why they call the outer richmond, the county. but i live off of fulton street. i live near 37th and fulton. and this is a very dangerous intersection in there. i've gone to the engineer spring street committee a number of times to ask all i'm asking is that the signal light when the light turns, turns green, that the countdown signal goes on automatically because if it doesn't, it's a shorter time to walk. and i've seen seniors not pressing the countdown time. and even with the countdown, even when i press the countdown time, i can barely make it across the street. so it needs to be lengthened. there's been a

death at the intersection. there's been a person who ended up in the icu and now that the street division is going to be getting new leadership, it's time to change. and, you know, the nine years that i've been following it, it hasn't changed. it needs to be more. more service to the more response to the community needs. you know, i pay my taxes and i expect to have the streets safe where i can walk and that's mta job is to make the streets where i can walk. and also each departments don't talk to each other for the street, the street division, engineering took out a blue zone and they didn't even tell the color code. i had to tell a color code to put in a new new blue zone. that's not right. when they take out a blue zone,

they should put another one in at the same time. so so i hope to see some changes. thank you very much. thank you. could we have the next speaker, please. hello i'm flo kelly and i work with the coalition on homelessness and the stop poverty coalition. and i'm a firm believer in team building and as and i can see how important it is to make headway. so one of the things that we would love to do is build more teamwork with with mta the staff, the board, you know, i don't think we should be arguing with each other. i think we should figure out ways to come

together and help everyone who's in great need. so i'm obviously here for winston and all the folks that live on it. the last time i counted there was like 48 rvs that are there. so a four hour limit would really misplace a lot of people and i'm here for everyone, but i want to point out one person who we have met named hamlet lee calderon. she wanted to be here today. but six months ago, she got hit by a muni bus and she had a medical appointment. today and that's going to be true of the next board meeting that you have, december 15th. so since that time, she's not been able to work and she has her family

living with her in her rv on winston. and it it's really important that we look at this as you know, people who who are marginalized and really because we need their their work but they're not being paid enough in this very expensive city. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. i do have more speaker cards. javier bremond, eliana binder moose venmo. mario smith. good afternoon. my name is eliana binder and i'm the policy manager for glide. since this board voted on september 19th to approve for our parking limits on winston drive and buckingham way, we have redoubled our efforts to partner with hsh to secure housing and a safe parking site for the community of dozens of families, students

and seniors who cannot afford the bay area's high rents and are living in rvs on winston drive and buckingham way. this community has been stressed, anxious, confused about what will happen and where they will go. since they will not be able to leave work or school to regularly move their vehicles to comply with the parking limits and avoid ticketing and towing. we are grateful that this board agreed to delay, implement ation of the parking limits for three months until december 19th. however as that date approaches, the city has not yet been able to establish a safe parking site or connect everyone with housing. therefore, we are respectfully urging you to delay implementation if the families living in rvs are displaced and scattered after the parking limits start, it becomes extremely difficult to support and connect people with resources. when their lives have been destabilized and they cannot be reached in a certain set location. so supervisor melgar's office and i have been

working on a safe parking site, as have we. we have also been trying to connect people with housing, but we need more time. there are hundreds of homeless families in san francisco desperately waiting for shelter. it does not make sense to displace this community and destabilize these families before they can access housing. a safe parking site and continued housing connections will help avoid the worst outcomes of these parking restrictions and provide these families with the dignity and stability that they deserve. please give us more time so that we can work on real solutions. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. hello, directors. my name is sheba van dba. i'm a policy associate with glide and a member of the end poverty coalition. i i'm here today because i'm deeply concerned about the impact of this looming for parking restriction on winston

buckingham way as we stated before to you all, this location is currently a place where community of monolingual, spanish speaking and portuguese residents have resided since the pandemic. they need and they deserve our community support from all of us to get them to a place of stability. san francisco has a limited family shelter and affordable housing, and it can take time to access. so we ask this board to consider delaying implementation of these parking restrictions. as community advocates, we've been working all the angles possible to make sure that these families are not displaced through enforcement vehicle. our homelessness is not isn't something isn't only impacting this already vulnerable community, but many across the city. the state and this nation. we appreciate those of you who have made an effort to work with us to uplift this issue. and we extend an invite to others who understand how detrimental this issue is. we urge all city

departments supporting people experiencing homelessness and economic difficulties to collaborate with one another and to partner with cbos community based organizations that are serving those communities in need. and please do not let these families scatter, which will take and make make it harder for asians to find them and support them in finding alternative options that meet their needs. we're asking for a delay in implementation until a safe parking site or housing options are made available to this community. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. good afternoon. chair and directors. my name is javier bermont and i'm an organizer with the coalition on homelessness and also part of the end poverty coalition. and yeah, i just want to echo what's been said already is that i strongly urge that this board, you know, put the

parking restrictions on the agenda before for the 19th and, and continue to delay the implementation of these parking restrictions because as we've heard from folks, we would be quite literally towing folks homes away at. and, you know, i think what we're coming out as a public to say today is that we don't want bureaucratic indifference to be the reason why we have dozens of people, you know, descend further into homelessness like they're already in a really precarious situation housing wise. and what we're what we're asking, you know, as a community is that we just have a little bit more time so we can do what we set out to do. and what we tried to agree on in september, which is that we need time to get people housed and we need time to get a safe parking site. and if we're this close to actually getting

people the support and the access to housing that they need , then we shouldn't just let the deadline expire and put people out on the street. so i really strongly urge today that the mta board votes to delay the parking restrictions for winston drive and buckingham way. thank you. thank you for your comment. next speaker, please. good afternoon. boards and chairs. my name is mario smith. i'm with the coalition on homelessness and the stop poverty toes coalition. i'm here to ask what everyone else has been asking. may we please get more time concerning this ordeal? the moment that the moment the parking meters goes up, as they said, all the families will scatter. the work we've been doing with them will all be for naught. and i would we simply need more time as everyone's already said, i'm here to echo and add to that

voice. but please, guys, we need more time for the families specifically. yeah it's as simple as that. thank you for your time. thank you for your comment. next speaker, please. good afternoon, board members. my name is goulet moussa. i am the community engagement manager with the episcopal community services and also a member of the end poverty toes coalition. i want to express our solidarity with the residents and their call for an extension on winston drive and buckingham way. i urge that you consider this matter with utmost urgency and compassion. this community is in dire need of a tangible solution to house them or provide a safe site for their rvs to park without fear of fines and displacement. to start finding this community will only exacerbate their financial struggles and displacement, especially during the holidays.

we kindly request that you put the extension discussion as an agenda item. do so will allow this community to have a sense of security and peace of mind during these trying times. thank you for your time and consideration. thank you for your comment. next speaker, please. i have an additional speaker card. juana ramos. hello. good afternoon, everyone. my name is juan ramos. i'm a peer organizer with the coalition on homelessness. um, same with everybody said, echoing what they said. but in my perspective, i want you guys each one of you guys to put yourselves in their point of shoes. and imagine you guys were in an rv and then you guys have to work 24 over seven or 9 to 5, and you guys can't afford to move your cars. then you guys get tickets, right? those tickets get piled up. you guys can't afford that. boom, you lose your car. where do you go

if the shelters are all booked up? do everything has been booked up? where do you go? so we could prevent homelessness by at least extending. that's the least we're asking is an extension of time for until, you know, maybe permanent housing or everybody has their different needs. but this is very important. maybe not for you, but for this community, it is. and i made sure today that i came to advocate and speak up on behalf of those who cannot be here. for example, like flo said, yamila is one of the families who was always showing up. but due to her getting in an accident with the sfmta or muni, therefore she cannot work. she cannot pay, pay certain bills or pay rent. so again, anybody can end up homeless in a blink of an eye. just try putting yourself in their shoes and really think about it. what would you guys do? what would you guys go if you guys were homeless and had nowhere else but your rv? so

thank you for your time, but please have a heart. and we really request either an extension safe parking housing, but please work with us to work with you to work with them. it takes a community to literally take care of our whole city and community. so together where we could be stronger, not divided. thank you. thank you for your comment. do we have any other speakers in the room for general public comment today? one more. okay. my name is chaya french and i am a staff member at senior and disability action and i just wanted to come up here, come up here and speak in support of everyone who just spoke up about winston drive and buckingham way, seniors and people with disabilities are more likely to have unstable housing and live in rvs and cars

, and that's because of lack of accessible housing, lack of employment opportunities and the reality of living with more health, health issues and ableism and ageism. so this is an issue that's really important to us, and i can't quite imagine what could be more important than people having a safe place to live to enforce this parking restrictions. i believe that we as a city and we as a community, we have a responsibility to create a city where everyone can have housing that works for them and we're not there yet. and until we are, i don't think we have any right to create rules that police the existence of people who just need resources. i think at a minimum, the ask that people are making feels so small to find a process that works for everyone to have the housing that they need to have a place to park. and i think we owe it to people to make that process as humane and as many minimally stressful as possible. and for it to take however many

months it needs to take. thank you. thank you for your comment. we have no other speakers in the room. could you please open remote? secretary silva at this time we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderator first speaker hello. good afternoon again. this is barry toronto. i first want to point out, i meant to mention the director's report that directors hamlin mentioned november 27th. he said it's a tuesday. the 27th is a monday, so you might want to correct that in the minutes because that's not the date. it's not a tuesday. the next topic is it's now coming on to the holiday season and heavy security around union square started already. and it'd be great if to make sure to know that the ada and the transit first policy should allow taxis to use the transit lanes even though it's closed to

other traffic at night. it'd be great if your your top people, such as the chair and director tomlin, meet with the police brass and make sure that word gets out to all the officers is that that taxis are allowed to use the transit lanes even through union square and we carry people who cannot get on a bus or cannot sit and wait for an hour for a bus to show up at night particularly. and it would be great if you if you made sure that we had access to the transit lanes through union square and also to make sure that that we have clear cab stands in the union square area, especially around the hotels and at macy's. so i appreciate that you can help facilitate this. and make it happen sooner than later. thank you very much for your time. thank you. next speaker. hello my name is rachel

clyde. i'm the west side community organizer with the san francisco bicycle coalition. to recap where we are in january of this year, the lake merced boulevard quick build was approved during the approval, the mta pledged to delay implementation until supervisor melgar and hsh could find a safe relocation site for the rvs that park along lake merced boulevard. we are very supportive of this quick build project as it will provide vital safety and access improvements and expand the bike network. however, almost a year later, there is still no safe parking site and the mta has moved forward with construction on lake merced boulevard, where several rvs have already been towed as a result. additionally in mid september, the board of directors approved parking restriction changes on two adjacent streets winston and buckingham. that will displace even more families living in rvs as the sf bicycle coalition. it is our mission to transform san francisco's streets and neighborhoods into safe just and livable places by promoting the bicycle for everyday

transportation, creating a new bike lane by displacing dozens of families does not create the just community. we are part of the end poverty coalition and support the work this group has been doing to support the families, students and seniors living in their vehicles. we are disappointed by the board's decision to move to approve and move forward with construction on the lake. merced quick build and the parking changes on winston buckingham without adequately supporting the housing insecure individuals that live there. transportation, safety and housing and security are two of the largest issues facing our city, and we will not fix them by pitting the issues against each other. we stand with the end poverty coast coalition and the residents and ask the mta board to delay the parking restriction changes on winston and buckingham. and we demand that supervisor melgar and the board work urgently to find a safe relocation site and permanent housing for the people who will soon be displaced. thank you. thank you. next speaker. hi, this is kristin evans. i'm a small business owner and also also serve on the

homeless oversight commission. um, i really do hope that we can work together as mta and. to come up with a timeline that doesn't involve displacement before the individuals being impacted are given appropriate offers. as the commission in our last update was that there had been outreach to about a quarter to a fifth of the residents that had been placed with appropriate offers, and so that had left a significt gap in the remaining people that still needed to be given an appropriate offer. um, it's my understanding that there's plans for a safe sleep site or a safe parking site, but we've not heard the details of that or an opening date. so this is really about cross departmental cooperation and acting as one city and making sure that we are doing right by

the people that these new enforcement measures will displace. so i ask your assistance in ensuring that we have a timeline that works for both department sites and ensures that the people that are currently on these two streets. winston and buckingham, are given appropriate offers before enforcement begins. thank you. thank you. no additional callers . okay we'll close public comment for item nine. uh, colleagues, any further discussion on items raised today ? okay. i'll just. i'll just state i and director tomlin had some correspondence about this. we're firmly in support of cross departmental coordination with. that's why we brought emily cohen to the previous hearing and modified our board action in response to the guidance received and i have received a request from the coalition on property tours for a meeting and

we have a meeting set with staff next monday to further continue coordination discussion on this pressing issue of affordable housing in this city. director tomlin, is there anything you want to want to add or respond? and if not, we can move forward. i think we discussed at the last meeting we want to do everything that we can to avoid towing vehicles and to also make sure that we're respecting all san francisco residents and we look forward to our ongoing collaboration with. all right. thank you. let's move on to the consent calendar, please. thank you. director. is that places you on item ten, your consent calendar. these items are considered to be routine and will be acted upon by a single vote unless a member of the board or public wishes to consider an item separately for all speakers. providing public comment, please identify which item number you are speaking to. item 10.1 requesting the controller to a-lot funds and to draw warrants against such funds available or will be available

in payment of the listed claims against the sfmta. that's item 10.1. a item 10.2 approving various routine parking and traffic modifications and making environmental review findings for items a through. i in the agenda item 10.3 establishing the 2024 sfmta board of directors and parking authority commission meeting schedule item ten sorry, that was item 10.3. item 10.4. adopting a resolution of local support for programing regional measure three bridge toll funds in the amount of approximately $22.6 million for three sfmta projects. the potrero modernization project. for approximately $3.5 million. the presidio modernization project for approximately $12.6 million and the light rail vehicle procurement for approximately $6.5 million. and providing assurances that the sfmta will comply with mtc policies. item 10.5 adopting a

resolution of local support for pending approximate $1.5 million grant that the sfmta has been awarded by the metropol written transportation commissions mtc's local parking management program implementation program for the san francisco pay or permit parking expansion project and providing assurances that the sfmta will comply with mtc policies associated with the receipt of these funds. an item 10.6 adopting a resolution of local support for the programing of state transportation improvement program funds in the amount of approximately $53 million for the new flier mid-life overhaul project and providing assurances to comply with mtc's policies that concludes your consent calendar. thank you, colleagues. are there any questions on the consent calendar from directors? i don't have a question, madam chair, but just a quick comment and you don't. we do not need to separate this item and i will move all the items after public

comment. but just to comment quickly on the very last item on our consent calendar. 10.2 item i, uh, this is for the elm alley project and for the elm street closure. we did receive a packet of signatures in support from some tenderloin community school students on this. this is a closure for, for the recreation area, for an additional recreation area. for them. this is a project that was allocated funding in the tenderloin community action plan. um as we know, the, the tenderloin is the dense most we populated neighborhood in the most densely populated neighborhood in the city and also has the most children and also the least open space in the city. we're trying

to change that with a couple of projects, including the golden gate greenway and this project. so this will, um, the funding department is going to sort of co-design a play area upon approval of this closure. so in full support of it and looking forward to, to seeing what they do with it and inactivated street closure. thank you for raising that director agency. any other comments or questions from board members on the consent calendar? okay, colleagues, i did want to flag a couple of the items that are street changes under 10.2 just to make sure this board is aware of what we're being asked to approve. so that's our items a, a and b, b also item are these are these are approvals for our class two and class three bikeways as and the i find the

numbering scheme for bikeways to be very counter intuitive and confusing. we our class one is essentially a separated bike trail. class two is a painted bike lane, but no physical protection class three is essentially a shared route where you might have a sharrow in the space, but cars and bikes sharing the same space. class four is a protected bike lane. someone should work on renumbering that. so it makes more sense. but i just wanted to flag for my colleagues that through the active communities plan, we've been doing a lot of surveys of the types of facilities that make people safe , feel safe riding in this city and no surprise, the data we have received are exactly what you would think that people are most comfortable in spaces like jfk promenade that are completely car free and completely safe operated. and then they are somewhat comfortable in physically protected spaces and most people, from what i've seen, feel very, very uncomfortable

being asked to share the same space with a car or a class three route. so i just wanted to sort of ask, we have adopted a goal for the active communities plan and for streets in the city that that are our plan should be safe and intuitive for all users. so i just want to ask staff, whoever is meant to respond to this sort of how do we think class two and class three facilities sort of meet that standard of being safe and intuitive for all users? and i'm just personally feeling somewhat uncomfortable continuing to approve these types of facilities. good afternoon. ricardo lee, city traffic engineer. so the items before you are part of the treasure island planning process in which various cities departments have participated, including to sfcta caltrans mta, public works. this has been part of a very long process, a process that is common to other new development areas. as i do want to assure the board that when we as staff

are at meetings discussing new streets, that we are taking the feedback that we're learning over time about bicycle facilities, pedestrian facilities, vision zero. and we are taking those lessons into new street design as much as possible. so the facilities that are in treasure island specifically that are related to getting in and out of the area, are protected. they are not adjacent to parking. they would be considered type four facilities, bike paths or type two facilities without parking adjacent to them. so the goal there is that if you are on a main street or approaching treasure island, that you would not be also trying to juggle adjacent park vehicles. there are, of course, multiple considerations that go into street design, emergency response and the space available . there's a lot of space constraints, the developable land. sometimes some facilities take up more land than others

and so we do need to be mindful of those kind of needs in certain situations where the streets are calm street, a local street, perhaps it may not have a class four facility, but but it may have other types of bicycle facilities to facilitate safe travel based on it being more of a local street, a slow street. so every everything that we learn gets incorporated into designs. unfortunately, the designs are part of a long process that may have started ten years ago. may have already been approved. but we do go, as advocates of vision zero and livability, we making sure that there is adequate bicycle facilities, but as well making sure that the streets are calm, as narrow as they can be, that they're safe intersections. all those kind of considerations go into it and there are, like i said, guidance that goes into

it. multiple departments get the comment, including the fire department on how wide streets can be. and those are all issues that the city has kind of grappled with in the past. but i think we're at this point at a at a point in which we are all kind of aligned in terms of these these street designs. so that's kind of at a broad level. you know, the board, i think, directs us to kind of implement these these street changes. but on these kind of processes, we're working as a city, creating a brand new city, brand new street grids and we're trying to do as best as we can to create new streets that don't have the issues of our old streets. we certainly don't want to have those kind of problems. so okay, i think we may be approaching the sever threshold. i'm looking at the city attorney . what do you think? if we want to have more discussion on this topic or can we just go on? yeah, if you'd like to have more discussion on, i would recommend you sever it. if you're

satisfied with staff's response, you can just move forward with, okay, i think i'm going to go ahead and sever sever b and r and then we can move ahead with the consent calendar. so we'll take public comment separately on those pieces. director hemminger well, if we're going to sever the items, i'll wait to talk on the severed items. okay, great. so let's, let's move forward to public comment on the consent calendar. less a, b, b, and item r of 10.2, please. are there any public comments on that section of the consent calendar. secretary silva can i present them? sure. i board members. luke bornheimer

i would encourage you to sever item 10.2 to be, which is about bayshore boulevard. so i wanted to bring this up so you can see this. i ride this section of bayshore many times with my child and witnessed many other people riding it. so 10.2 be currently creates a class four bikeway, which is a great thing. we should have more class four bikeways in the city. we should really only be building those in the city. unfortunately, it's only northbound. so if you look here and actually if i if i zoom in, you will see that the southbound a bike route on this section is actually on the sidewalk, which includes a fire hydrant. and a pole in the middle of the sidewalk. if you're riding a family cargo bike, you can't ride on that sidewalk. so i like 99% of people who ride a bike southbound through the section right in the right turn lane on an eight lane, one way road that is a highway off ramp and a

highway on ramp. this is every day reality of riding a bike for everyday transportation in san francisco, people will ride southbound in that northbound bikeway. it should be designed and built as a two way bikeway. i don't quite care about space constraints or the fire department or whoever else gets input. people are using that right turn lane as a two way bikeway right now. we should build and design on our bike infrastructure to match how people are actually using our bike infrastructure in the city. so i appreciate staff's work on it. i have talked to public works about this and mta staff about this in the past and i just encourage you to sever that item and for staff to create a two way bikeway design, install it as soon as possible and ideally with concrete. because again, this is a highway off ramp and a highway on ramp where someone walking was killed not less than three months ago. thank you. thank you. are there

other comments on the consent calendar last the currently severed items. my name is scott brockman and i'm here in support of consent calendar item 10.2. i i have been advocating for this limited street closure of elm street for almost four years. it struck me as a simple way to create more outdoor space and increase street safety in the tenderloin. but even in the first year of the pandemic, when so much effort was put into creating ways for people to get outside safely in other parts of the city, it turned out to be impossible to close this one block of a small alley, not impossible to do, just impossible to get done. it was not until the community demands that resulted in the tenderloin community action plan and strong support for it in the participated three budgeting process that the simple project gained traction of course, it is odd that it's taken so long. a few years back, the national

association of city transportation officials proposed such closures adjacent to schools as part of a pandemic response and recovery strategies . their estimated timeline for one of these school streets was as days or weeks to plan and hours to implement it. but here we are today. i hope you'll agree that reimagining how elm street can be used is the right thing for the neighborhood. and specifically the 300 children who attend tenderloin community school. thank you. thank you for your comment. any other speakers in the room. good afternoon, commissioners. i would like to request to pull item 10.2 a off of a consent calendar. it was an informational item that was discussed on the october 17th and i was told that we can pull it off consent for further discussion and public comment. appreciate it. okay. any other

commenters in the room seeing none, please open a remote at this time. we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderator first speaker oh, excuse me. i meant to speak to the delay to extend the parking meters and not do this during the holidays, so i'm sorry, my hand was still up, but i was next to speak. thank you very much. please think of the folks. bye bye. thank you. next speaker. hello. good afternoon again. this is barry toronto. i want to point out that most of the items in do not go through engineering. hearing the bimonthly engineering hearings that are held on friday mornings. so i'm

concerned that these items were not vetted properly with the public before they appeared on the on the consent calendar. i'm very disturbed by that, especially the ones involving marin street and cesar chavez and kansas. those did not get through a proper vetting through a public hearing. second, regarding the treasure island, i cannot comment on any of those changes because i go to treasure island with passengers or pick up maybe once every two months. so i'm not able to accept that. i think i hope you vetted it properly and proper outreach with the people who already live there at treasure island. if not, you should you should at least ask staff to provide proper feedback on what a proper what the feedback was from from the outreach meetings, if you held any and last but not least, is the let's see the here is

that the i'm concerned about the stop sign putting on potrero excuse me on connecticut at 26th street. it's an uphill a very steep hill. and i'm not exactly sure that forcing a bus to stop at a stop sign there going up or down the hill would be efficient or would would be meet the safety purposes necessary. so question putting a stop sign there at on on connecticut at 26th street. thank you very much. thank you. next speaker. hi my name is michael howley. i'm calling to also request that you sever item 10.2. be that area of bayshore is a really confusing and frankly terrifying place to bike through, especially if you've just emerged from the hairball, which is better than it used to be, but still very confused and not very pleasant on a bike. and the

bike route, as is, dumps you into oncoming high speed truck traffic. so i think this item should be separate and as previous commenters stated, discussed as a two way protected bike lane to connect to the southeast corner of the city, which is extremely neglected in a lot of ways, not not least of which is how difficult it is to get in or out of that area on foot or by bike. thank you. thank you. no additional speakers. okay. so we've received through public comment two additional requests. so we will sever 10.2 a and b, but i'll go ahead and do a vote first on the consent calendar minus 10.2 a, b, r, a and b, b. is there a motion from the board on the majority of the consent calendar? first, so moved on the balance. okay, great. please

call the roll on the motion to approve the consent calendar with those noted items removed. director hemminger a hemminger. director henderson. hi henderson. i director hinsey. hi kinsey. i director. so i. so i director kahina. hi kahina chair ekin ekin. i thank you. the consent calendar is approved. okay, so we'll just go in order. i'll take now ten point 2aa the class four bikeway on church street. it is there any discussion from the board on this item? and if not, we'll open it to public comment for anyone in the room on 10.2 a the church street class four bikeway . hey board members. luke bornheimer i didn't really prepare for this one as much, but i ride through this area quite often. i appreciate staff's work on it. i think that this area would be a great

opportunity and may be out of scope for this project right now . but to create a full sidewalk level pedestrian plaza that also has a sidewalk level bike lane, the project team has been doing a great job to make the best of what they have with the materials that they have access to. but i think there's a really great opportunity to make that section of church street a really great space as a transit plaza. tons of people walking there, tons of people biking there, tons of people taking transit there, and a bunch of businesses that would benefit from a really robust pedestrian plaza that just has muni going through it. and this is unrelated to the bikeway. but i will point out that the transit only lane on church street between market and 15th is regularly ridden through by cars regularly like 1 to 2 per light. so something to make that stop would be great. thank you. thank you. other speakers on 10.2 a.

at least have the overhead. good afternoon again, commissioners. ty bash. recently this board has voted to disallow a right turn from market street onto church street for commercial vehicles that will be oops, i have this thing upside down, this turn right over here. the justification was a conflict between pedestrian boarding the southbound church and busses and commercial traffic actually, this conflict was identified to be so severe that in 2020, making a left turn onto church from market as well as crossing market street from the north for

non commercial vehicles was outlawed. so today going down on church street there's really only one way to go is driving south on church street which is a street that actually dead ends a block away. it's very difficult to navigate at this intersection going down on church now, on the flip side, sfmta is looking to implement a class four bicycle of south bound bike lane on the block, which crosses the path of travel for muni riders and is just inches away from sfmta platform. that is going to be and is being claimed to be heavily used by by muni riders. let me bring that up. during the october 17th meeting, mr. rhodes shared with you the plans and stated church street

is not a designated bike route, so why are we designating a class four raised bike lane where human powered and electric bikes and scooters traveling up to 25mph, just inches away from unassuming muni riders waiting for the j church in the 22 bus or inches away from the proposed public plaza and dining space. okay that's your time. thank you. this makes absolutely no sense. thank you for your comment. are there any other speakers on 10.2 a in the room? seeing none, please open a remote at this time we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment on this item. 10.2 a should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. no speakers. okay close public comment. is there a motion on on 10.2 a. i will move the item. is

there a second? i'll second. please call the roll on the motion to approve item 10.2. a director heminger heminger director henderson. henderson. director kinsey a kinsey i director. so i. so i director kahina a kahina ekin i icon. i thank you. that item is approved moving on to item 10.2 b. got it . okay. public comment for anyone in the room on 10.2 b this is to establish a class for bikeway. this is bayshore boulevard, class four bikeway on bayshore for that. one speaker has already commented on. okay. seeing no speakers in the room on this. one yes. sorry deputy city attorney susan cleveland-knowles. i think in the future going forward, when someone asks to sever an item

that should be the end of their public comment and then they would get public comment at this opportunity because that didn't happen today and we didn't notify the speaker. i would suggest giving him additional time today. but going forward, it would be better to group the substantive public comment at the time. the item is heard. thank you for clarifying. go ahead. thank you so much. i'll keep this very short. luke bornheimer, the one additional thing i would add is that as the other caller mentioned, you're coming out of the hairball when you're coming southbound because of the curb cut, you are actually then forced to ride east toward the oncoming cars to then come back out into the street and people are crossing each other very closely on bikes. and it ends up being conflicts there as well. so it'd be great to see actually that sidewalk and crossing be upgraded so that it's either just a raised crossing to this bikeway or just cut a new ramp

that allows people to come off the ramp and not have to ride directly into car traffic. sorry if i'm not preventing a good visual. thank you. thank you. any other speakers in the room on 10.2? be if none, please go to remote at this time we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time. ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment on item 10.2 be should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. no speakers. okay, we'll close public comment. directors director hemminger please. maybe first if i could ask lou, could you put your graphic back up? i think be helpful for all of us to see something visual and i had a question for the city traffic engineer. are city engineer, whether you're familiar with this location and whether you're satisfied with what we've come up with.

ricardo city traffic engineer i will present talia leong, who's the project manager for the hairball project, so she can answer questions about the details of this project. obviously i'm not satisfied with the condition like it's a situation that we've, we've struggled in the past to address. but i'll defer to staff on, on the details of the project. i do want to clarify that there was a statement made that the this item had not had a public hearing on a friday. this is the public hearing for this item. and that was in the agenda as a as a hearing that was posted for the board to hear this item. thank you. just give me a minute while i pull some graphics up that might help. and director henderson, is your hand raised on 10.2 be as well? yes. okay great. okay.

okay. just to explain the item a little bit, because i know it's a little bit confusing. we've been working on improving what's in the hairball for a while now as we can and looking at what's actually feasible out there given how complicated the hairball area is where cesar chavez, potrero and bayshore all come together underneath the 101 overpass. so it's a very just a lot of utilities, etcetera, a lot of conflict areas. and it's also a really important area where pedestrians and bikes cross from the east side to the west side, from the bayshore into the mission, into downtown and vice versa. so it's a really important place to make these improvements and we're doing everything that we can given the

resources that we have and we're starting with some of the things that you see here and that are on the consent calendar. and they include, you know, paint and post improve joints and some concrete that's protecting those bike lanes. so i will also mark will go into some details in just a second in terms of that portion of bike lane that luke brought up. but those the class four bikeways that are proposed are protected by concrete rail. so they are protected by concrete from traffic. this is this is the beginning of what we're trying to do here. we are also working with public works on a long term plan for this area to do more concrete changes. but those just require a lot of detailed design and coordination with public works and utilities to be able to do even the smallest things here because of how complicated this area is. so i just want to note

that we have been looking at this at a high level for a while and looking at everything that we can possibly do to make it a little bit better and safer. so i will this is the list in just sort of layperson language of all the things that are happening as part of what you see in the agenda. but we also have some drawings that explain that particular area that luke brought up. so i will pull that up and then mark can talk to the class four bikeway section. three yeah. can we? you know, i hate to say it, but the, the photograph is a lot more instructive. an interesting right. i can never read a plan. i mean there's while they're working to bring up the detail let me speak to this from a

larger policy perspective. this board has previously directed staff to move quickly, including in light of the loss of 40% of our capital budget. as a result of the loss of prop eight two years ago. we found this to be a really successful strategy in order to help us leverage outside capital money by working incrementally and quickly in order to move towards the ideal solution with many quick low cost steps along the way, we still like what's out there right now is completely unacceptable. the design proposed by staff is far from perfect, but but we believe it helps us advance our goal, which would otherwise be impossible given our capital constraints. hi everyone. jeff but the testimony we're getting and if it's accurate that what users are actually doing with the

current design is doing a wrong way, i mean, don't we have to find some way to frustrate that? so that that's not what's occurring out there? yeah. so the i mean, i'm familiar with this area as well and that's exactly how i bike through it. and again, i would love to provide an actual path solution on. we just don't have the means to build that right now. again, could i just have the photograph back? you know, these dueling graphics really don't help the cause because i thought the point that luke was making was, is there something on the sidewalk we could do? could we take that plug out of there? could we get the sign out of there? yeah yes. and those are those are exactly the solutions that we're trying to move towards. but again, removing that fire hydrant is far more expensive than we have the resources to do and would take years longer. so again, what

we're trying to do is to do something in order to put the resources together and develop. we even know if it's an active plug, it's a it's a high painted as and there's also pga or utility poles. um, may i i'm sorry to get out of whack here, but so, so along the chase center, you know, i think i remember seeing bike lanes that go both directions. is this a possibility we can implement similar type of configurations. so then instead of encouraging only one directional traffic and then the other side needs to have haphazardly, you know, hovering over pga power pole and fire hydrants. so again, that's exactly our goal for later. once we have resources. but in the meantime, we're trying to move incrementally as quickly as we can afford to do so. so moving

moving towards that ideal solution would require that we cancel this project and come back to you at least a year from now as part of the active communities plan process in order to move forward with anything and what we believe again is that by moving quickly, we using cheap material oils and admits highly imperfect design, it helps us to establish the case for getting outside funding in order to move forward with well and a better. i think we're all on board on that. the question here is there there's a trade off posed here, which is if you want to do the halfway measure here, you've got to live with people going wrong way on a facility. and i'm not sure that's a choice we want to make. i mean, the first rule for doctors is do no harm. and i think that's the question being raised by by this design. if

it's essentially encouraging illegal use of the facility, we well, i'll let staff speak to that. i feel firmly that this accepts the existing behavior and makes that behavior far safer and more comfortable than the current condition does as we work to identify funding in order to solve it fully. that right turn there is going to where is that going to 101 or going into a city street? it's going to bevmo. o it's going to the to the oh, it's yeah, just a street. how about you answering that question? yeah. so we can just walk through. i think it's exactly as director tomlin said it's understanding that there's existing behavior and trying to make it as safe as possible while there is a essentially by the way, marin is a city street and it goes right into the dpw

yard right there. the issue with making this a contraflow, two way contraflow lane here is that there is a pinch point at gerald where the lane really narrows down to nine feet. and then we have a conflict issue. but i'll let mark walk you through that real quick. um, hi, everyone. so up on the screen is our proposed design. it shows that one way protected bike rail. and as you can see when you're on bayshore itself, you have a pretty generous nine foot wide lane. and then a pretty generous buffer. but as you go southbound towards gerald, it starts to tighten because of the slip lane that's there. you have an adjacent 11 foot lane. you continue point to where you saying, sorry, this is really a this is not really a user friendly graphic here. yeah um. yeah. so if you see where the cursor is on bayshore itself,

you have a nine foot wide bike lane with a i think it's a eight foot wide buffer, but as you move south towards gerald, where the cursor is now, the bike lane is nine feet. but then you don't have a buffer anymore because you have a travel lane for that slip lane. so because of that, we run out of space to have an adequate buffer and it becomes tight for two two way cyclists to maneuver on that area, especially as we have the southbound bicyclist crossing gerald, because that's the path that they would use. they'd have to get onto that median right here, this pork chop island. my cursor is at. and right now the curb ramps are not aligned. they're kind of skewed. and so it makes it difficult to make a turn if you're going southbound as a bike or towards gerald as a bike. and having to make a right to cross the street as well as watch out for oncoming traffic that's coming through that slip lane. so we felt it got really tight in that area and that to put a two way would not be intuitive for those who don't

bike here regularly. so for them to end up at that point and not know how to cross gerald going southbound wouldn't make sense. and that's why we decided to make it a one way right now. you do have the sidewalk so you won't have northbound bicyclists on the sidewalk. you'd only have southbound bicyclists and that's six foot wide sidewalk shown and it'd be protected with rail compared today where it's just sharrows, it's class three, you would call it. so it does provide separation between vehicles and bikes as they cross through here. dr. henderson, did you have a question. i remember that there was some quick build projects that were happening on

bayshore, but this is not part of that. this is a completely different. okay. and okay. so sorry, were you finished? did you have more questions? okay okay. and we have closed public comment. kent do we have additional questions from board members? i did have a question in similar to i missed staff's facial expression when they responded to director henderson. um, so this is not part of the bayshore. quick build project or is it? it's not part of the bayshore. there are two separate projects, separate. mm. okay and

does the bayshore quick little project. i'm assuming it's roughly this way. that's, that's already constructed, right. no wait i'm just trying to see if there's similar project boundaries. yeah, that's correct. the bayshore quick build project has already been installed. this is. okay. um i think i'm done for now. thank you. please. sorry, i don't bike in this area, so i'm just trying to really grasp the experience of somebody traveling southbound and trying to understand where they're coming from, how they're connecting and how they're going into gerald or not going into gerald, perhaps still going on to bayshore. um, if you could walk us through that a little bit just so i can that could be

better illustrated for me and possibly members of the public. like, are they coming from marin coming down? like, how, how are they getting south? sure i think pulling up google street view might be a that would be wonderful because that's what we've been doing. like chair ekin and i have we have our google maps up and running right now. so it's a terrible experience. it sounds like it doesn't sound fun at all. why is it called the hairball? why is it called the hairball? because it literally looks like a like a terrible, like wonderful. oh, i see. i see

. that mike's on. can you just. you can talk from that mike. you can use that lower mic if it's more helpful. oh, okay. does it. oh, great. perfect. okay, so up on the screen, i have a aerial view of the location in question. so this is the intersection of bayshore and marin and basically the bike movement today that happens is you have northbound cyclists coming from bayshore or approaching marin crossing this crosswalk and then getting onto this sidewalk. that's considered a shared use path for pedestrians and bikes. and then conversely, southbound bicyclists come from this same path going southbound and get off on this little curb ramp here. it's kind of hard to see from aerial view, but there's a curb ramp here and then cross along this crosswalk here and continue south on the sidewalk. and that's the bicycle movement today. got it. and from this

from that sidewalk, how do they end up connecting with the bike path, going southbound? what's their route of travel? how do they transition out of that? yeah. so as they continue down south on the sidewalk, they go around this curve approaching gerald, which is right over here, the slip lane. this is the intersection of gerald. and there's another ramp on here that they get down on and they cross across his bike, across this crossing through this pork chop island and then through this crossing again over here where there's these green back arrows and then continue on. gerald eastbound or south. eastbound, yeah. and this project or this item wouldn't do anything to change that behavior. yeah so that behavior would still happen. it's only just to protect the northbound cyclists that are going through this through. gerald right now, if you're coming from gerald and you're going to go along,

continue north and you see how this bike lane kind of drops off, you see the green drops off and it turns into a right turn pocket. so the proposal is to convert this right turn pocket into that nine foot bike lane with a eight foot buffer protected by concrete rail so that we can continue that bike lane from gerald up to marin. and into this into the path that people use today. okay. thank you. this is super helpful. um, an and if i understand this correctly, this is the first phase of it seems like a more involved project. do you have an approximate timeline for that second phase? yeah so there is a second phase, but i'll leave it to talia to give you the update on timeline. sorry, this is a team effort. it, it's all good. yeah. so we are in the process of starting detailed design on our long term work here and that's something that will go

through public works to get to 100. then we are going to be looking for funding for the capital improvement. so it's a ways out which is why we are aiming to get some of these near term improvements in sooner. okay. so can i just jump in? i see you in the queue, director. so, but just related to that, can you just help us understand we know this is a pattern that's happening. even the director admits this is the path of travel he takes. is there nothing we could do in a near term quick build fashion that could address and provide a safer treatment for those heading southbound and then is that larger capital going to address the problem and how this is given in the pinch point? at gerald, we deem this the safest option to do right now in terms of make making sure that folks don't get to another conflict once they're going southbound and they get to gerald street. so, yes, i would say it's the

safest option that we have right now on the table to just be able to get rid of that right turn pocket and protect that stretch of bike lane with our concrete barriers. so that's going to be the safest option. it's just to protect whatever movements happening in that area between the vehicle traffic and the sidewalk in the bike lane. so, yes, that's what we're we believe this was the best option. that's why we brought it in front of you today. in terms of the long term, we have some options as it's still being design lined, but we have some options for that intersection at marin to help that crossing because that's actually where we see the most conflict. that's is that crossing across from that bike lane into the actual pathway that goes underneath the overpass. and that's where we've seen a severe injury happen before. and so we're doing some work around creating a raised

crosswalk there and changing our curb ramps to align properly and some other treatments to help with that area. and i will say that that the long term design is still being designed. so there's some work to come from that. and is the raised crosswalk, is that a near term project? does it have funding? that's part of our long term. that's part of the long term. got it. director. so. um may i ask you this question on that stretch between marin and cesar chavez? early on, you described basically from my understanding of i get it correctly, is that both northbound and southbound bicyclists will be basically crammed in that segment right. you mean the shared multi-use pathway? so director la kahina

was asking, explain to us how people move around right now with the northbound and southbound. and you describe up to the marin street intersections on bayshore, but some like i'm assuming along the bayshore boulevard between marin to cesar chavez, both northbound and southbound bicyclists will be using the same space right. currently i'm asking currently what the correct currently that's what that's what happens both northbound and southbound bikes use that space on the sidewalk as a shared use path to maneuver through that area. okay and how why is that sidewalk. i think think it's six feet minimum. i'm not exactly sure of the exact width and how was what's the minimum width of our bike lane that you design? it depends on many factors. i guess

the minimum you can go down to is four feet, and that's typically if you don't have a gutter, that's great. so the one that in your proposed project, right, which is that segment between marin and gerald, which is the next block south from what i just asked, you're a new bike lane is nine feet only to northbound why can we cut it in half if four feet for northbound and four feet for southbound? because i'm going to say that i think i really believe what luke was mentioning. i have a child myself and my child's school is from preschool to middle school and i've seen a lot more parents are now riding these pretty big bikes, you know, that can fit like two kids on the back. they're not our european fancy version of like, you know, skinny two wheeled. there are there are a lot of things that

come along with it. luke had a really good point, like you guys just say, they can't simply go around these that fire hydrant which is active sounds like it's confirmed by you. and also the pga power pole. so i would love to see family that actually feels safe on their way to school and on their way back home. and if we have to make a choice with the limited resources that we have, i think that simply we can do is that instead of telling people this is only for one direction, then we can simply make a signage to make aware of all the cyclists or people who chose to whatever wheel they're rolling that they are in this new area that we are creating to protect, to save lives. everyone is aware of that. people are now going to be really tight and they have to slow down. and because they're

expecting them to be sharing the same space for north and south, can we accommodate that? because it would be really confusing to only limit it. i mean, we know that for reality, the parents are not going to be try to squeeze through the building and the fire hydrant. and then because i really don't want to see a kid's leg got clipped by the wall of the building or the fire hydrant, they are going to be put putting them into that nine foot wide bike lane and that's a very generous width for one way direction because i want to challenge if we i want to know, is it possible to cut that in half? because you said that the minimum bike lane is four feet and now you're creating a new bike lane that is nine feet wide, only one direction down. yeah it has to do with where it leads to. that pinch point at gerald is the reason why there's not a two way bike lane. it's not because of the width of the space that we have. it's because of where it leads to and the

conflicts that that can lead to. once it pinches down. okay i would like you to consider the practicality of the reality of how people actually are going to use the space instead of the pinch point on your turn radius or whatever else. the technical end hearing is because practically we have a parent sitting over there and i have a lot of parents that i knew that is actually traveling around this area. um i would love to not seeing any kids getting injured or any parents have to try to haphazardly try to dodge this new protected lane. and in the end, actually not protecting them. director henzi, i see you in the queue, but i also just want to jump in and ask what would it take if the board doesn't approve this today and we ask you to actually formalize a space for people to move in both directions safely, which might involve looking at that slip lane and whether that

should be closed off. because there's another way to access bayshore anyway, we what would it take for you to just go ahead and do that and come back to us? i think it just takes further design review. we have looked at options. there's a lot of traffic impacts, etcetera, and there that pork chop that you see there has a major utility pole in there. so we've looked at different options to try to get around this and we have kind of come to this place, but we can go back and do further design if that's what's needed. have you looked at the idea of shortening or eliminating the slip? yeah that was a thing that we were looking at. the only difficulty with that is you do have a fire station on gerald and they use that slip lane to access you know, the city from that area and it becomes difficult for them if you close it out because it gets pretty tight. around that pork chop island. it makes it difficult to

make that turnaround it so the slip lane provides fire access in the event of an emergency. so we did float that idea of either calming down traffic through that slip lane or closing it out . but we were at a standstill, essentially. we've been through our internal coordination with fire and other entities to try to come up with the best solution on. and someone mentioned before, there's a lot of things we end up grappling with. and so we get to this place where we try to present the best solution. an and that's that's where we are. but if we can depend on what's needed, go back to the drawing board and see what else can be done. okay director hennessy had her hand, but did you take that away? i, um, i think you sort of answered my question, but i'll try anyway to see if it elucidates anymore. um i think i was going to ask a

version of the question. chair you can already tried, which is i think we're on board with the, um, the protected bikeway north bound, but i just want to know if we, we thought we thought about and i'm sure you have again, you think you entered this, but if we tried quick build approaches for the southbound, um but possible protect lane that are public comment or brought up. yes we did look at the possibility of making that two way again on the issue that has come up has been the pinch point at gerald and the. lack of ability to do much with that slip lane. therefore that's where we ended up where

we are today. um, we, we in thinking about what we could do quickly to just make our existing pattern safer. this is, this is where we are and we know that we can remove that right turn pocket and create a good amount of space there protected by our buffer as a way to, to take what's existing today. and add as quickly as possible and as vetted internally. as much as we can make something better. so that's how we ended up with what we have today. we did look at all the different possibilities. okay, got it. um and then i guess for madam city attorney, we, we only have the northbound direction for us today. so we could, in theory, take action on it and direct staff to do

further design. is that correct? thank you, director. i think your options today are either to continue the item for further clarification. you know, maybe a more fulsome staff report with drawings or are to deny the project with direction to staff. you can't modify the project today first because there aren't we don't know what's feasible. and second, because it's not right. agendized for that or you can approve the item as presented as well. right. okay dr. henderson. thank you. i just wanted to point out my question about was this part of the quick build is because it feels like this is a huge artery that we have a couple of different projects on excuse me, to address in the near or, you know, to address immediately. but it feels like because you

call it the hair ball, it sounds like it's complicated and a mess and i would think that we would prioritize this in the list of capital projects so that we don't get satisfied by these immediate improvements to safety and then not really have the long term improvements in mind because it feels like, you know, we can say yes to various quick builds to improve safety, and i support that. but we got to figure out some. i just don't want the timing of this to then somehow lower the priority for the improvements to this particular section of the streets and so i just wonder if there's a more or maybe we can hear later about about the long term plan so that this can be high on the list of capital

items that we address maybe through some hopefully through some grant applications or something. but i just think that we're kind of figuring out where the hard points are and dealing with it. and then the long term vision just becomes out of out of sight, out of mind a little bit. so i don't i don't know that there's a question there, but that's just my concern about this particular project. thank you, director henderson, director tomlin. so to direct to answer director henderson's question, this is, as staff described, they are working on detailed design for a longer term solution that would cost more in capital resources than we currently have access to. so again, this is a short term impact movement that is aimed at helping us get the resources that we need for a much, much longer term fix. but one of the things that i'm hearing from all of you is that the direction that we had heard to move

really, really quickly in order to maximize safety of the network to the extent that we could, given our staff constraints, that's and our capital resources that we have aired that we have, we have moved too fast. and you would like us to slow down the pace of the improvements in the network in order to bring you more up to speed on the design details and present some of the choices that i think staff have resolved at the staff level and perhaps do spend a lot less time on rapid expansion of the network and instead spend more time on fewer, more capitalized projects that. that would get stronger. i wouldn't characterize it that way. i would say what i'm hearing from director henderson is we're we're dealing with this particular issue right now. we're putting attention into it. we're trying to fix it. but as we're hearing from the public, we're not fixing it. so this is the shot and if we're not form,

if we're not going to improve safety, why are we going to improve, improve this project? i would say that it does improve safety. and even for the south bound, even even for the south bound, because we're putting we're replacing what is sharrows and a right turn pocket with a full protected bike lane protected by concrete barriers and there's other portions of this that do do some improvements in the area, but the formal signage will still tell people to go on the sidewalk. yes but i absolutely believe that it's a safety improvement. please go ahead. i think it would be the best use of our time to continue the item. just to give staff ample opportunity to explain the project with all their designs. and i know we tried to solve for things right now with like google maps and things like that. so i just want to give folks a fair shot to really

present the best version of this project to this to this board and to the public like so i would like to formally make a motion just to continue the item so that folks have ample time to explain this in more detail. i know we have other things on the agenda, so i just want to keep it pushing to a second. okay let's please call the roll on the motion to continue. item 10.2 b to a future meeting. director hemminger hemminger. director henderson henderson. director hinsey. hi, director. so i. so i. director kehena. hi kehena. i chair. hi ekin. i thank you. that is approved. thank you. and we'll now take the remainder of the consent calendar. that's i think 10.2 are a b b. those are the class two and class three bike lane facilities. is there any public comment from anyone in the room on these proposed street improvements. hi. board members.

luke bornheimer i'll try and keep my comments short. we're coming up on 2024. it is well known that class two and class three bike lanes and bike facilities are just just are not what we should be building in cities. never mind in like a completely new development where we want to encourage people to not rely on cars and use active transportation. an unfortunate i think this is a good, good example of what happens when staff is just trying to make things work and something gets deprioritized and there isn't really a hard stop there. so i think, you know, i would encourage you to direct staff to make these class four bikeways rather than class two or class three bike routes. and i think more broadly, i would encourage you to establish policy that

tells staff they cannot create anything but a class four bikeway because otherwise what we see and i've seen this time and again is that projects get watered down and whittled down because, well, there's this one spot where the bus needs to go here or someone needs to park here or a fire truck needs to go here, someone needs to load here and all. always, always, always. the thing that is cut out is the class four bikeway or the materials used for it. and so i think like i think what staff and the agency and the people of san francisco need is you to actually just create a policy that says we don't do class two and class three bikeways anymore. we just we just only do class four bikeways. and that's because there's a mountain of data that shows that this is safer and it's better for business and better for the climate and better, obviously, for people's safety. so that's a broader suggestion. but in this case, yeah, i urge you to direct staff to make these class four bikeways instead of class two bike lanes and class three bike routes, which are essentially

just a green splotch of paint on a on a car lane. thank you. thank you. any other speakers in the room? okay. seeing none, please open a remote at this time, we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderator for speaker. hi, this is michael howley. i want to thank the board for covering these items and i the same work that takes me through the hairball area on my bike also takes me to treasure island quite frequently and i don't know how many of you have been out there lately, but it's a really weird hodgepodge of bike facilities. you get some class four lanes, nice and protected and a really nice multi-use path along avenue of the palms and around the corner. it feels great. and then suddenly you're in a class two lane and then you

get a class four lane again and for an area of the city that are essentially rebuilding from scratch, it's so weird to me that there are already proposing these week paint only facilities. i know the roads on on mccalla is item a and b are a little weirder maybe that's really the only option until new paths are installed. but yeah, i really appreciate the board already talking about this and how it's not really acceptable to be proposing these totally unprotected types of facilities from the jump. so there's anything you can do to fix that here or to create policy for future projects. yeah, really appreciate it. thank you. thank you. next speaker.

moderator next speaker. oh, they lowered their hand. no more callers. okay, we'll close public comment on this item. and is there are there any questions or comments? dr. kahina, did your hand was your hand raised for this item? okay. director hemminger thank you, madam chair. and thank you for pointing these out to us, because i do think it brings up a the agenda is not on there. i'm sorry. okay. it's still showing 10.2 b, so they're asking for a 10.2 r, a and b b to show up on the screen. thank you for your attention to detail . so. the policy question to me, i mean, i had always understood treasure island and the redevelopment of it as this opportunity to have a showcase

of sustain transportation. there spending a small fortune moving the ferry dock from the oakland side to the san francisco side to make that work. an and it sounds like they're trying to cheap out on the bike network. do you have a sense as let me ask our engineer how many bike lanes how many miles of bike lane are they putting in and what classes are they? i will say, say that if there is interest from the board to have a more thorough presentation about treasure island, the development happening there and how it accommodating bike facilities from kind of a large perspective rather than kind of the discrete projects that are being presented here. i think we can we can work on that. i think this is part of a plan that staff is bringing forward to execute what i've already approved. street plans for the project. so so it is in a way

this is kind of documenting decisions that have already been discussed with other departments that are not at this hearing. so from a perspective of providing more information about bicycle planning that went into treasure island, i think i would probably defer to other staff that are more familiar with the project in terms of specific questions about what's in front of the board in the calendar. we i have brian wu, who's our senior engineer, that can answer questions about specific segments, but larger planning questions, i would i would think it's more fair for people that have been involved in the planning to address. yeah. and madam chair, i mean, in lieu of just going through a lot of questions today, i would appreciate a chance to look at this sort of from a global perspective and see if we find that the, the plans that are apparently are well advanced are sort of headed in the right direction. an or we're aiming

too low. yeah. i mean, look, i'm familiar with the streets out there, too. some of them like mccullough. i mean, that's that's that's a hairball street. but a lot of them are like, you're in iowa. i mean, they're big wide streets and avenues. and i don't know why you just wouldn't put a class one bike lane everywhere you look. i will say that that there's probably a confusion about right now treasure island being in flux. so there are some things that are interim. there are some things that are being phased in and there are some things that that need to go in later when construction is completed. so i won't say that right now either what's being proposed or what you see when you go to treasure island is the final state. but but you're saying they have a plan that yeah, there's an ultimate. there's an ultimate plan for treasure island that goes block by block and describes the take you up on your suggestion. so we will we will arrange that through the commission secretary to have a presentation on those issues.

there are larger planning issues that are happening all over the city for other development areas. i, i think if there is concern that when staff comes and presents the details of those planning efforts, that we would wish to anticipate that earlier the like i said, most planning that's happening now is considered doing this discussions such as this as part of the planning process. but there may be situations where the planning started many years ago. there may be situations where we have to compromise. as i know, class four facilities are preferred in certain situations, but if a street is very minor, if a street is low volume, a class four facility may not be appropriate and it may require additional ten feet, 20ft of right of way that could have been used for pedestrians or for buildings. so we want to be mindful that the planning that's happening be done in concert with other needs. but at the same time, keeping in mind that we want to have a safe

network. and i think the but it is an opportunity. yes definitely. it's not a brand new neighborhood. it's been definitely. but it's got a lot of it's got good bones. but we haven't put the flesh on the bones yet. yes. any any time that we start from scratch to some degree, it creates an opportunity to create the kind of street network and the kind of urban environment that we want to see in in the future. so, yes, that that i think, is what everyone wants to achieve. thank you, madam chair. thank you. director henzi, please. yes yes, i would concur with director hemminger and wanting to take this up along with a. a more holistic conversation around treasure island. um, so to that end, is there a time line that you mentioned a lot of other agencies and a lot of

other moving parts here is there a timeline that we need to approve this by that we would need to approve this by or could we wait to have take this up along with the a more holistic conversation around treasure island? yes, good afternoon. bryant wu, senior traffic engineer. i understand the discussion very closely regarding all the bicycle facilities on treasure island and yerba buena island as far as urgency, i would humbly request that at least item a be heard. that is the portion of mccalla road after you exit the bay bridge east bike path. um, and i can explain what is on the agenda specific likely to facilitate a bicycle facility fee over the next three years of

construction so that particular item i would suggest, be heard today and perhaps some of the other items could be continued to a ladder discussion on. i think, madam chair, i think that's the direction i would like to go. but since you severed these items, i'll defer to you on on how how you would like to proceed so that the you're saying. aye. aye. that's the class three. that's the share shared bike route. that's what you'd like us to move forward today for some deadline reason. yes that's correct. okay. director tomlin. brian, please correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't several of these streets built or under construction and aren't they all in an adopted developer agreement and an adopted environmental document? i mean, i'm wondering, does the sfmta have any ability to change the design design of these streets

that are already in a developer agreement that a developer is building? yeah. in this particular case, yes, you're correct that the facilities are in the developer agreement, except what was on your agenda today is an interim layout for the street until all of the ramps on both sides of the islands is completed three years from now. so what you're hearing before you today is an interim condition for bikes for a bicycle facility to get the treasure island. and how long would that interim facility be in place? is that item aa only or is that all of these items? okay. yeah, that's aa only and that would be in place for the next three years until the west side bridges is completed in 2025. okay okay. is there a meaningful difference to hear it today versus on december fifth that our next meeting? is there

a reason not to continue this item as well? to allow for more background? no okay. any other comments or questions? okay. is there a motion to continue? i would make that motion and include in it that it we're continuing it to a meeting where we can get a briefing on the full array of bike improvements, including the status of the developer agreement and how much it constrains our range of motion. so okay, please call the roll. i will just, just want to note to the directors, while you're saying december 5th, we are actually in full motion already for finalizing the agenda items on that. so i'm very reluctant to say this item can fall on that, given how close we are to publishing for the next meeting. so the expectation, i think realistically is that it's actually going to be a few meetings out in order to prepare all the materials. i just wanted to let you all know that. but

there is a motion and a second. do you want me to call? okay, i'll just ask my question again. do you mean january 16th is when this would come? potentially january 16th also may be february meetings. i see. okay what's the response from staff on that timeline? with that timeline, i would request that item aa be heard today. i think you'll be happy with what you see. can i? i'm sorry. so these are interim strategy. i would like to see what is the ultimate final road condition. say like 15 years from now. you know, of course, because this is really difficult, but i found myself really challenging to see piecemeal items and not knowing what the ultimate goal, the true final intent it is. but i'm happy to see what you have today

in light of the scheduled time constraint that you have. thank you. so this is strictly for item aa and conveniently, i have some pictures if i know how to display this, how do i switch to the. go ahead. thank you so this is the class four facility as you are coming from oakland across the eastern span of the bay bridge. and you're going through the one of two hairballs of treasure island. you're doing multiple loop de loops and you have a two way facility and you are approaching what we call the south gate ramp. and so the bicyclist in either direction will ride through this class four coming over the bridge. and once you get past this point, you have to go underneath this new hair ball and we also we have a class four facility here. there's a traffic signal that

won't be activated for three years until the west side bridges project is done in. but in the interim, we have maintained the class four facility both directions as you go underneath the hair ball until you get to this all way stop. oh, sorry. the west the west construct action is underway, right? yes that's correct. it'll be completed in 25. yes that's correct. okay. so and at that point, you want to have the bike lane built as part of that project? not quite as part of that project. we're creating a second class four facility. so what you have here today is a combination class three, class four for the interim condition until we can get to class four everywhere. that's correct. okay so item a is class three and class four for the next three years until we can make it 100% class 4 in 2025. got it. okay colleagues,

we have a motion and a second to continue the item. we're being asked by staff to move a today. i will ask, is there a motion from the board to move a today? i'll move that. i'll second, second. okay. please call the roll on the motion to approve item a director hemminger. a hemminger. director henderson. hi henderson. director hinsey i hinsey i director. so i. so i director cajina. i chair egan. no you can. no, thank you. that item is approved 5 to 1. okay and then please call the roll on the motion to continue the rest of the items on the motion to continue items 10.2 are and be director. oh, sorry. just one second. director heminger heminger. director henderson. henderson i director hinsey. hi kinsey. i director. so i. so i

director cajina i. karina chehregan i iken. i thank you. that is. that item is approved. that motion is approved. okay. and i'm just going to make a request to staff now that in the context of the active communities plan that we have this conversation with this board well in advance of the final adoption of the plan on how safe is safe enough and is there a minimum safety threshold of bicycle bicycle facilities that this board wants included in that plan? on to the discussion. we've had today. i would love to have that conversation. and again, i want to also have the conversation about to what degree should we be moving fast with with less than perfect materials versus moving very slow with perfect materials, given our staffing and our capital resource constraints? understand. okay, great. please call item 11. very good directors places you on your regular calendar for item number 11 approving the sfmta's 2024 legislative program. good

afternoon, chair. ekin directors director tumlin. we are here today for your for your consideration with a presentation on the proposed 2024 legislative program. we come to you every year around this time with an overview of our local, state and federal priorities as also noting our regulatory affairs role. this year, our program was informed at your request last year for some earlier conversations with those of you who asked for that and had the opportunity to get some of your input into this process. you know, one of the observations i would make about this year, particularly in sacramento, we're going into a second year of the current two year session, is very dynamic election year, a lot of a lot of things are still in flux. but i think that we're clear in making recommendation to you today about where we see the emphasis and the priorities being in the coming year. and so the team will give you an overview of

that. this this program was also presented, presented to the cac on october 5th. and they had an opportunity to discuss and consider the priorities and approved the recommended set of priorities that you'll see here today. yeah, i talked about that . so today i'm going to start and introduce monique webster, who is our regional government affairs manager, and she will go over sort of a quick high level of what we accomplished in the past year and then look forward to 2024. and then joel ramos, our local government affairs manager, will present a high level on local and then we have a closing slide on our regulatory affairs oversight. thank you. there we go. hi, good afternoon. i'm monique webster, manager of regional government affairs with sfmta. and i'm going to start

out with highlighting some of our state and federal successes from this past year. so first, i wanted to share with you that our team was fully engaged in making the case for transit operations funding to avert the fiscal cliff that we and many other operators faced. this was really our number one priority at and as part of a statewide coalition, we secured a commitment in the state budget to not only retain $2 billion for transit capital projects that were in danger of being cut out, but also an additional $1 billion that could be used over the next four years for transit operating needs. another notable outcome was the successful enactment of ab 645, which we already touched on during the director's report today that authorizes the use of speed safety cameras for the in san francisco and five other cities. this year. we also saw passage of ab 361 authored by assembly member ward that permits the use of cameras on city owned vehicles in order to enforce

force parking, restrict fines and in bike lanes. another notable outcome is that the state legislature acted to place a constitution amendment aca one on the november 2024 ballot and if that is successful, it will lower the voter threshold from two thirds to 55% for state and local tax increases that fund affordable housing and public infrastructure. importantly including public transit capital projects. finally, we secured state funding for several important safety and resilience projects listed here through both the budget process and competitive grant programs. and then turning to the federal side, our team worked to secure the political support needed to successfully win funding across a number of competitive grant programs. the largest was a $30 million award for the woods and creek bus maintenance facilities . as. so looking ahead to 2024 for our state legislative priorities, this is the second

year, as kate had mentioned, of the state legislative session that will be reconvening on january 3rd and transit operations funding will once again be our number one priority. and there will be a number of things taking place in that arena, including legislation that will give the metropolia transportation commission the authority to place a regional revenue measure on the 2026 ballot and ensuring that hard won commitments made as part of this year's state budget agreement are also upheld . making our streets safer and reducing traffic injuries and deaths remains a top priority to that end, we'll continue to defend our gains and support efforts that encourage traffic safety on parking, we will support and coordinate advocacy efforts with public parking interest groups, other cities and stakeholders on efforts to make paying for parking easier and utilizing city resources more efficiently. and finally, as this board knows, avs are very dynamic area right now with a lot of interest from state lawmakers. we don't know what legislative proposals may come

out at this time, but we have put this as a priority to watch, engage in and take positions as appropriate. so now turning to the federal side for 2024, it again unlikely that we're going to see any movement on big pieces of legislation or policy in this year. given the split congress. but in 2024, our focus will be to continue to leverage opportunity his coming out of the bipartisan infrastructure bill and also other federal grant programs, plus working with the mayor's office to advance community project requests to our delegation. soon, we'll also be keeping a close eye on other policy priority areas listed on this slide and that concludes the state and federal piece. and i'll now turn it over to joel ramos, who will cover our local priorities and legislate action. good good afternoon, chair eken directors direct. tumlin joel

ramos from the local government affairs team working under our esteemed director kate breen. all of my efforts are support by my colleague janet martinson, who had to leave today to get to some family obligations. but she's really responsible in huge part for a lot of the legislation that we see coming through the agency for the board of supervisors. my particular role also serves in overseeing the legislative side as well as responding to constituents inquiries and requests pertaining to the board of supervisors or in response to the board of supervisors hours and as director breen had mentioned earlier, that work is largely overseen by my colleague chadwick lee, who also had to leave to get back to that. that very work, our work, as you probably all well know, is mostly around just making sure that this agency has the legislation it needs from the board of supervisors. and so there's a number of legislation

that does have to go to them, particularly with regard to legislation that is very high in cost, like over $10 million and or has contract lengths that are over ten years. so there's a number of pieces of legislation that go through there all the time. and then of course, i'm also keeping them apprized of various policy debates or even i've had the pleasure of talking with some of them regarding some of your appointments. it's all part of the work that the local government affairs team does. some of the most probably the most important stuff that stands out to me from last year's work was getting the central subway architectural engineering services surface segment, trackway systems, quality control and design integration contracts approved through the board of supervisors. that was the work that would need to be putting the finishing touches on the central subway. it was a big deal because it was a pretty big

amount. and people thought that it was, you know, over and done with. but we of course, needed to get this through the board of supervisors to keep going with that work. looking ahead, we are planning on continuing to work with them. some of the major items that i'm working with, director kirschbaum and her team on are like the automatic train control system communications based train control systems, procurements for new the new busses is going to be needing their authority fauci their approval. and then there's a number of things related to like the yards and the building progress. all of that work will be here for them and, and assisting the agency in making sure that everybody has what they need to be informed on these matters. sometimes there's ballot measures that come up that we all need to be on the same page around. there was a recent charter amendment proposed. this is the kind of work that we are doing all the time that it is keeping everybody apprized of what each of the entities are doing,

whether it's the local, the mta or the board of supervisors. i can speak at any of these on any of these issues. probably the things that i would point out are most important. well, they're all very important, but so i'm not going to call out any one of them. i would just note that thanks to director breen and her good efforts, we've got the speed safety camera implementation that's going to take some work and actually locating it and getting all the authorization that we need to implement it. i think that's going to be a real exciting one over the year and then of course, we've got director torrance still here. she's not here. oh, sorry. yes, of course. yep. and director. for let's see here. yes yes, this one. oh moussa was not working. yes. sorry. and then i was going to say director torin also, of course, has a lot of things that are happening with av taxi mobility related things. so i

feel like i'm always talking with the board of supervisors about whether it's scooters or autonomous vehicles or our taxi programs. there's just a lot of engagement that we're always doing with the board of supervisors that we're here for. so i know it's been a long afternoon, so i'm going to keep this brief. i'm going to turn this over to my esteemed colleague, kathleen salas, to talk about the regulatory affairs and making sure that we're all in compliance. thank you. yes i think it's here. perfect. good afternoon, chair egan and members of the board, kathleen salas, regulatory affairs manager here today to talk about our state and federal rulemaking opportunity, which i like to call ledge program adjacent. the rule makings are the public process by which we really have an opportunity to shape the rules and regulations that govern so many aspects of our agency. we have staff. kathy broussard is an excellent job. and you heard from her earlier during public comment for kate,

but she helps identify the opportunities and then we send them out to the subject matter experts monitor the process, the process, collect feedback and determine whether or not we're going to actually public publicly comment on something at the state level. so the california administration procedures act provides an opportunity to help us shape those regulations that have the force of law by the california state agencies. so some sample agencies that we participate in the rulemaking are the california air resources board, cal osha, the cpuc, and the department of motor vehicles at the federal level, the rulemaking is the policy making process that the federal government uses to develop and to develop an issue new rules and regulations. but they also use it to amend and repeal and repeal an existing rule when they need to. so some sample agencies are dot fta, nhtsa and the federal highways administered ation. so recent or current rulemaking topics that we're working on right now are

transit worker safety, some nepa issues, amending accessibility requirements for transportation facilities, state safety oversight, regulation on zero emission forklift rule, other things that are associated with carb and our public transport safety certification, training program. so i'm happy to go into more detail on anything or answer any questions, but thank you for your time. i conclude the presentation. yeah, that is the presentation and we're happy to answer questions. as you wish , colleagues. are there questions for the gov affairs team? director henderson. yes, i'm curious. as i heard the word nepa and so i'm curious what on nepa you all are responding to now. so we've been engaging with dot. i mean, the realm of environmental project streamlining environmental reform has been something that we've been focused on for a number of years. there have been

there has been incremental progress at the federal level around how the fact that states like california have the california environmental quality act sequa and the federal national environmental protection act often are redundant. and so our efforts have really been focused at digging in. and the administration actually in coming to california and implementing the infrastructure investment and jobs act came to us and asked specifically if we had recommendations, options on how nepa and federal environmental review could be streamlined and that has to do with, again, ensuring that california's review and approval counts, that you don't have to do it a second time. if the threshold is met in terms of environmental law and something that director tumlin has thought a lot about, and if there are other things that you would want to add to that, but it's an ongoing effort, i'd say that we continue to look for when the interest is, is there, as it has been with this administration action, including both the gubernatorial administration here in california, but also the

federal administration. and do you feel like progress is being made there? because i know i mean, i know it's nepa and it's big, but i just wonder, do you think that in incremental is real progress or is it just sort of i mean, i, i think so. but jeff, i really would look to you if you had some insight because he's been really leading in this space, too. yeah, we're right now we're focused on administrar rule change rather than legislative change. and fortunately, the buttigieg administration has been quite interested in trying to figure out what can we do within the context of the statute in order to get out of the way of good projects. and hopefully i will be traveling to washington in january in order to continue some of that work. got it. thank you. thank you for the question. dr. heminger. thank you, madam chair. to subjects kate and jeff may want to chime in on this first one. automated vehicles

and the statement in your program is, is pretty broad. yes and i wonder whether the program would benefit from greater specificity. you know, on the one side of the spectrum is how i would characterize where we are now, where we send strong letters into the state and they pat us on the head and say, thank you very much for your ideas. at the other end would be giving hundreds of cities in california veto power over who gets to drive on their streets. so where in that spectrum do we want to fall? i mean, where do we want to get to? well, i'm just going to tee up, jeff, by saying that the space is incredibly dynamic. we know compared to a year ago, we are seeing legislators as super lean in on this. we have senator cortese, who has asked for a study. we have mayor bass, who's gone on record along with mayor breed, making the case for cities interest in having access

to data. and so i would expect that we will see something play out. i don't know if we can predict what that is, but yes, and i can say just a little bit more on this topic where we're engaged across several different departments and with both the executive and the legislative branch of government on four parallel paths. one is a path aimed at our regulators the most , the state regulators, but also nhtsa at the at the federal level. the second is a legal path, a third is a. what really we think is the best path to support the advancement of the industry, while also upholding the public good, which is a more collaborative negotiated path. and. a legal what's the fourth one that i'm now missing? legislative. oh, and of course the legislative path. yeah. which we which is an important

part. but we also want to make sure that if any legislation does pass that it doesn't unintentionally incur for us. right? so really what we're trying to get is industry to the table in order to define a clear set of public, good oriented outcomes as along with performance metrics and data to support that so that. 911 calls and twitter aren't our primary source of performance data for the industry. and we believe that is that level of collaboration and transparency is what best supports the advancement of industry, as well as making sure that we have the tools that we've got in order to make sure that our streets still work. okay the second one is about these numbers. it's in one of the items in the report about the contract limits we have with the board of supervisors. and i

believe it's ten years or 10 million bucks. did that originate with our origination as an agency? 20 years ago? i can answer that if you want. no, sorry. the those limits are citywide and they're in the charter for its section 9.118. and it requires all contracts except for construction contracts. contracts greater than ten years or $10 million to be approved by the board of supervisors. so it applies to all agencies, not just ours. it applies to all agencies include yours and specifically in proposition an, a that expanded the authority of the sfmta and its board. it specifically carved out 9.118 as something that the sfmta is still some object to. well, that could be a legislative item. i mean, do we

find those numbers and those limits inhibiting. i know. look, whenever you go to the board of supervisors, they have the chance to say no or to say do this instead. yeah, i would argue that there are many factors that are far more important that get in the way of our good action and it would be quite interesting to have a whole session on what are the obstacles that stand in the way of our ability to deliver what you want. most of the obstacles that we face for the delivery of the clear values that you all hold and that i share those obstacles are outside the agency and i would be happy to have a session enumerating each of them , as well as what potential strategies there might be in order to remove them as well. and i know just from my own personal memory with potrero and now with the train control thing , you know, our staff is

building schedules around the fact of when the board of supervisors was has an election on and that's not the best way to run a railroad. so look i'd be willing to take you up on what you suggested about things outside of mta control if we've got a chance of making a difference on changing them. thank you, madam chair. thank you, director kahina, please. yes. thank you so much for your presentation. i did have a question about fares specifically free muni for youth as we're approaching the new budget season, i anticipate that fares and pricing is that's going to be a factor that comes up for us. so curious on the state level, i believe at a previous briefing i had with the team, you all mentioned, i think

it was ab 19, 19 or 1 of those, there was another one this year to 1802, withholding, withholding. holden continues to come back and try, but so far but let me correct your question. so exactly. i was going to ask you if you could just let members of the public know and also us like a brief, like just description of what the appetite is, right now in the state to support that type of support for transit agencies to offer that that resource for community members is where some of the blockages that you're seeing. is there anything that we could do perhaps to our people power to leverage to support something like that? you know, i mean, my reflection and i don't have jeff or monique would want to add something is that it falls within that larger conversation about transit agencies going over the fiscal cliff. right? and so we have relied on a huge coalition of partners, including partners from community based groups that have supported free transit for youth free transit in different

forms, but that that tension is still there. right. and so if we can't identify ongoing, permanent, stable, predictable sources of revenue to support transit operations, it becomes a trade off exercise. and whether you're going to fund programs like that through reductions in service or make other changes that are going to impact what you're putting out on the street, that is the service that people rely on. that is the dynamic of that conversation. it hasn't led to, i would say, in a positive way. it hasn't led to a splintering within the coalition that can continue to advocate for public transit in general and in particular for transit operations funding. i think it's also really important to remind ourselves that going into the second year in sacramento, we are not guaranteed need. what was promised to us in last year's budget. that is what we're talking about as saving us and giving us a longer runway.

we still have to fight in the face of an increasing state level deficit to keep those funds that were already acted upon last year but have to be reacted upon in this year's budget. right. so you know, i think assembly member holden will take another pass at it. i don't think he's giving up and within the context of the california transit association, there is interest out there. but i think you would see a dynamic that is coming more from the budget perspective than it is necessarily from from the policy perspective of, of free transit is a good thing. jeff, please. yeah and i would add to that, one of the strategic things that we're trying to do is to set up the conditions for expand the tent as big as we can get it in order to fight for our stronger state support for transit, just as has already happened in new york. and so whether it is our free transit free muni program

or our advocacy for bay pass through clipper, our advocacy for clipper 2.0 and the tools that that offers and our advocacy for the california integrated transportation program pilot, which will dramatically streamline our ability to means test everything . we're trying to put the tools in place that invite more and more and more people into the tent to acknowledge that transit is essential tool and it has to be funded. and in any normal country around the world, it would be funded largely by the state and federal governments. yeah. so if holding does succeed, are there local levers that we could start pulling to figure out a way to support that program? so i've heard in multiple occasions different supervisors and different folks say like, we're happy to provide advice, we're happy to provide other sources of funding to support this because transit is essential. and folks, i think there's alignment on that, that

piece of it at least. so wondering if there's, you know, if that's an avenue we've explored or if we've had some success there. i mean, are you asking a question about what should happen at the state level or is it more at the local level? well, if the state doesn't meet us, where we need to be to do that, what's the plan b? is it local then at. and so that i would kind of defer, if i can on just fare integration and our overall fare policy conversations that we have. i mean at the state level, san francisco is really looked to as a model for the free and transit programs that we offer. i mean, one of the probably among the most robust in the state. but i think that if we keep hammering on the same approach, which is just put more money into free programs versus the approaches that that director tumlin just outlined that are more comprehensive, like the cal itp, which ties you to a family of programs so that

you know, you can benefit not just from discounts on your on your utility bill, but also qualify for free transit. i think those are going to have a better chance at success in my mind, maybe not a great answer, but that's kind of where i see the. yeah, yeah. it's a great perspective. thank you for that. yeah, thanks. seeing any other questions from my colleagues? i just had maybe 1 or 2, but i can't believe this is our last conversation. like this with you, kane. maybe you'll have to come. come crash the conversation next year. so it's very broad and all encompassing in order by design to give you flexibility to be opportunistic. and, you know, when everything's a priority, nothing's a priority. so i just wondered if you might kind of help us understand what are like the true priorities your staff will be prioritizing in the next year . yeah. is it i mean, can we interpret it's like the number one on the list. number one of the categories is funding. yeah

i mean, i think what we try to do because you were very clear in like in the 32nd elevator speech, what's our top 3 or 4, right? and so at least if we're talking about sacramento, we have those things listed here, which are, again, transportation funding. right? i think we're going to be spending you know, if it's a pie, a lot of that pie is going to be in that space because of the conversation around the potential for a regional measure, because of the whether there's going to be legislation that would help or need to bridge some road to a future regional measure. there's conversations around that that were teed up by senator wiener in the context of bridge toll bills. there is a lot going on around that. and a lot of parties involved in that conversation from advocates in the region, including spur bay area council transform a lot of the social justice advocacy groups are also at that table along with transit agencies.

cmas and mtc. so we have to be in that conversation. director tumlin is fully part of those in the leadership context, and then we're supporting that at the staff level. i just think realistically that's going to take that's going to be a lot of work. vision zero. i mean, the four things that are listed here, right? transportation funding, vision zero, parking payment flexibility, autonomous vehicles, those are four things that i think are going to rise to the top. and that's just some offense, some defense. i think there's a lot of things that happen in in the work that we do that are defense in nature, that we don't we're preventing harms that we don't see, but we're ensuring that we kind of keep keep some of those bad policies away from us as much as possible. and so i do feel like those from the on the offense side, although avs could be both offense and defense, i think those are the four priorities that at least at the at the state level, let me be clear. i don't want to give short shrift to the day to day dynamics of what happens with the board of

supervisors that joel and jeff and julie and others are managing constantly. yeah. okay. and then just maybe my last question is just on vision zero. given like you talked about, like the two big priorities got done thanks to your leadership. we also know that those two were compromises and they were sort of minimized for maybe our ideal version of both of those bills in order to get across the finish line. so i just wonder how you think about those things given vision zero is still a priority going forward for the state and the years and years it took to get these things done. is this something that you think about as like the next 2.0 of these things or like studying and learning? of course, we haven't implemented the speed safety cameras, but we know 33 is not nearly enough to cover the city. i guess if you can help us how you're thinking about that. yeah, i mean, i think our large city dot coalition, which jeff is the chair of, really keeps vision zero at the front of our kind of mutual interest in california.

right. and so if you were to say four years ago, vision zero people were like, what skepticism are we really? do we really have a speed problem? we're in the present moment. i think we've brought people along on that journey. i think we've had incredible support, frankly, from the federal administration who has embraced safe streets for all and all of those sort of agendas that we need to support policy work. in addition, the ntsb, which supported us on speed safety cameras, has brought its voice to new technology known as speed governors. and we have interest amongst some of the folks that we're talking to as a tool, a technology tool that could be explored. it's something that new york is looking at, and it's the kind of technology that could be used in different ways, whether it's on municipal fleets. as a pilot or exploring opportunities that might have benefits for insurance. as you know, the insurance you pay if

you're a driver and you volunteer to put a speed governor. so those are some of the tactical or specific proposals that are out there in the vision zero space. i don't think we're ever going to end that work, right. i mean, we know it's aspirational, but there are specific things that fall under that umbrella that i think we're going to be advocating for. this year. thank you. yeah, no further questions. i'll go to public comment on the legislative program for this year from anyone in the room seeing none, please open a remote at this time. we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderate later for speaker. hi this is barry toronto. i don't know how i'm doing it, but i seem to be the first speaker on the list, so appreciate it. a couple of

things i noticed in your report. the report that there's a possibility ben-dahan reform next next year, or a proposal from kate turin and their staff. it would be great if it would make sure that it was vetted first properly with the industry and that any objections or any feedback from the industry be shared with you in advance of any proposal that would go before you so it would be appreciative that that you made sure the industry was completely involved and not just given perfunctory presentation. the next thing is, i urge you to ask your state legislators. to actually what do you call provide more regulation on on the tnc. as you can see, the state puc failed to understand the impact of autonomous vehicles on the on the san

francisco society as a whole. and look, the dmv ended up suspending the license of crews and so the state puc is not to be trusted concerning our electricity bills are going to go up many fold in in the next year. so it would be appreciative that you include that in your priorities is to get some legislative relief by allowing cities and municipalities and counties to have some regular authority over tnc and also define last but not least, to find some money, some debt relief for the purchase medallion holders who actually have hired us divided as the taxi community between those who get to work the airport and those who don't get to work the airport and the price and the huge price break between the cavs that can operate only in the city and those that can also operate at the airport. so it'd be great if you include that in your legislative agenda. thank you very much for your time.

thank you. no additional speakers. okay. we'll close public comment. is there a motion to approve the legislative program? so moved second. second, let's call the roll on the motion to approve director heminger heminger. director henderson henderson. director hinsey. hi, director. so i. so i. director kahina. hi kahina. i chair ekin. hi. you can i thank you. that item is approved. thank you. thank you. please call the next item places you on item number 12 presentation and discussion regarding a muni ford program update. yeah okay. well good afternoon,

directors. almost good evening. so sean kennedy, i'm the senior senior manager for the transit planning group here at the mta. last month i talked through a service update and including some great news that we had seen the highest ridership we had seen in the system in four years. so i still want to want to want to give those kudos, but this time i'm going to focus on some capital projects specifically our muni ford program. also have some great news to share and instead of burying the lead, i'll tell you right now on the on the opening slide, that muni ford program is turning ten years old in a couple months. amazing that we are ten years old, which means i'm ten years older and i definitely show my age. but super excited about that. and even more importantly than that, this body has now approved over 100 miles of transit priority improvement projects in those ten years. so, you know, ten

miles a year on average, that is phenomenal and has actually made sfmta really one of the preeminent transit priority programs in the country. so really, really exciting news. but before i get too far down that path, i want to take a step back and just review how we got here. so as you guys know, you know, san francisco has a number of unique challenges, especially from a transit perspective. and san francisco is the second densest city in the united states. second only to new york, unfortunately. and unlike new york, our previous transit planners did not have the foresight to endow upon us a really robust underground transit network and consequently about 80 to 85% of our daily transit riders are doing so on the surface roads. and so you know, there's a lot of competing needs in this. this picture was picked specifically to show just about all those competing needs. i think in one picture, it's

pretty amazing, but there's a lot of competing needs for that space. and consequently, congestion plays a highly significant role in in how the system rolls out and how it's it operates. s and, you know, we can talk about and we have we do talk a lot about what that means from an individual person's perspective, live on the system. you know, delay a long time to get from a to b, very unreliable service. but i do want to take two seconds to just point out the larger systemic impact that has on the system. this is a pretty a pretty quick illustration, but basically we're trying to point out here with this graph is that if you just had a 30 minute round trip line, meaning you know, took you 30 minutes to go from a to b and then back to a so total round trip time. and you wanted to run a ten minute headway that would take three busses. so the average person on the street is standing there and they see a bus coming by every ten minutes and it's costing us three busses

to run that service through congestion or other other friction points in the system. if that trip time increases and in this case, say up to 45 minutes instead of half an hour, we're now having to put a bus and a half, which obviously would really be two busses on the system and that's going to cost us about 50% more in operating costs. and just pointing out that this increase in operating costs means nothing to the passenger. the person standing on the street, they're still seeing the bus just come every ten minutes so they don't see an increase in service. they think it's the same, but it's costing us 50% more to deliver that service. and of course, the converse is true as well. if we can get that trip time down to 20 minutes, you know, we can we can save a whole bus. and what we do with that bus could be to make it come more frequently. so now you get 7.5 minute service or we can save that money and either bank it or use it on another line in the system. so taking that understanding, we

developed the muni forward program ten years ago. it is a program that's near and dear to my heart. i came to the mta just to implement this program at the beginning it was me and a half an fte and we've since been able to grow, grow that, grow that number quite, quite largely. but you know have some amazing staff and some of them will be talking here today. but you know, through partnership ups and through working with the rest of transit operations, we've been able to deliver a lot of these pretty amazing little tidbits and bullets to the overall program, including and not limited to about 75 miles now of transit, only lanes in the city in large part due to our close association with the transit engineering group at and the department of public works. so we're pretty successful and we're so successful that four out of ten people in the last

budget budget's budget cycle said that hey, they really want the agency to spend more time and more money and more resources continuing to advance these goals. and so here's the map of looking forward and back the blue lines is 100 miles that we've already implemented. the gray lines is where we hope to go. so over the next the next several years. and you know, really shows a concentration in the near term on on our our on our lrv fleet or our our our train service. and but in general, really connecting cross town trips throughout the city is where we'll be focusing this next round of improvements on in addition to kind of these large corridor projects. we've you know we've gotten very good at delivering project cradle to grave, you know, all the steps and pitfalls along the way, be it technical, political, all monetary. you know, we've kind

of delivered and figured out ways to get around those. but i think one of our most impressive and really exciting things that we've done has gotten really good at reducing that time to benefit ratio and getting projects for the most part, 90% in the ground. as soon as as soon as this board approves them. and getting those elements out there, one specific one that i'm super proud of is the l taraval. you know, that was a safety project with some side transit benefits that we had 25 people hit getting off the train on. and the five year period before that project, we implemented this board, approved that project and we implemented the quick build portion of that work as soon as we could. and since then we haven't had any, any crashes on that corridor. so super exciting and really proud of that work. and you know, not only have we kind of figured out how to how to improve safety, but people vote with their feet and people are coming to muni forward corridors because we've been able to integrate service

improvements with capital improvement points as well as, you know, operating management improvements like headway management, all on these very important corridors, pre covid, we were seeing 15 to 20% ridership gains on on muni forward corridors and just as a reminder, that was under the backdrop of the system in general was seen about a 3 to 4% reduction in in transit ridership. and that carried through through covid, you know, through the lane program or the temporary emergency transit lanes that we did during covid. you can see on here that, you know, the corridors where we did muni forward and total work, we're seeing much higher ridership gains than we are for system for system as a whole. so that's just some quick overview, overview numbers. but i'm going to bring up michael rhodes, who is our manager of transit priority in general, and he's going to walk through some specific corridors and numbers that we're seeing there. and

then i'll come back and talk about where we're going next. so with that, michael all right. thank you, sean, and good afternoon directors. michael rhodes, transit priority manager . i'm going to highlight some of the programs accomplishments over the past decade at the corridor level. so starting with the 14 mission corridor, since 2016, we've made a series of improvements across the entire 14 mission route. we've added transit lanes, bus bulbs, signal priority, bus stop spacing changes. we've increased rapid and local frequency on the corridor and we've made pedestrian safety upgrades as well. so as for results, we've seen, we saw a 99% ridership increase in the years before the pandemic, sort of as an initial kind of result of that. and since the pandemic started, we've seen a 92% recovery. we in terms of ridership compared to pre-pandemic levels, which is one of the strongest ridership recovery levels in our system,

and really especially impressive because the 14 does serve downtown in usually that sort of an indicator of lower ridership recovery. but despite that, it's really doing great overall travel time on the 14 local end end has been reduced by 9% since 2015. not just in the project areas, but as a whole and travel time in the soma section of the line has been reduced by up to 31% since bus lanes were added as part of the title program in 2021. we've also seen safety benefits for people walking. there's been a 33% reduction in pedestrian injury collisions on mission street in the inner mission since that project was first implemented in 2016. next, looking at the 22 fillmore corridor, we've also made a series of improvements since 2017, most dramatically, we extended the 22 fillmore to mission bay and created the new 55 dogpatch route. we've added bus lanes, bulbs, islands,

signal priority bus stop spacing changes, especially along 16th street and on church street. and we've made pedestrian safety upgrades on this corridor as well as we almost always do as part of muni forward projects. so some of the results so far include a 102% ridership recovered on the 22 and 55 combined compared to pre-pandemic and travel time savings of 1 to 2 minutes just during the quick build phase of improvements on 16th street with we expect a lot more than that as the full project comes to completion in the coming months. of course, on geary, we've also focused some of our most intensive and comprehensive improvements throughout the entire route. so since 2018, we've implemented transit lanes, bulbs, signal priority, stop spacing changes, many other reliability upgrades similar to the last two corridors, not to mention some older transit lanes that we did as part of the original transit first policy in 1970s and upgrading with red colorization in about ten years

ago. so we've also, of course, made pedestrian safety improvements, but also urban design upgrades on geary as part of the projects we've done. and so some of the results for geary looking at, you know, looking specifically at the geary rapid project, which is in the sort of middle section of the line through the western addition japantown, we saw up to an 18% decrease in 38 hour travel time, up to a 37% improvement in reliability or reduction in the variability of travel time and 70 to 80% reduction in vehicles going over 40mph. so on the safety side, we really saw the safety benefits of reducing the roadway for general vehicles in terms of equity by calling the geary expressway and japantown in western addition neighborhoods. the project has helped to reconnect communities that were harmed by 1960s urban renewal policies. to get a sense of the scale of transit lane expansion, in particular, that's just one part of the toolkit with muni forward, but it's one

of the most visible this series of slides shows the growth of transit lanes in the city from 2006 to today. so this is 2006, a much more limited transit lane network than we have out there right now. and this is 2013. so right before muni forward was fully launched, there are some new additions compared to 2006, like adding the t-third transit lanes along third street, but not a ton of change. you know, we hadn't we hadn't yet really ramped up at that point. and here we are in 2023 today as you can see, there's been a huge expansion of transit lanes over the last decade under the muni forward program. in fact, just since 2020. so just the last 3 or 4 years, there's been a 33% increase in the transit lane network. we've also begun colorizing many transit lanes red as you can see here, which increases compliance by over 50% and this slide shows transit lanes that are already approved as well as some that will be. so

basically, this is everything we've already got, plus what's coming soon, recently approved projects. we're continuing, as you can see, to add many more transit lanes in the years ahead . and here are some of the most recent muni forward projects we've completed just in the last few months. so that would include the quick build transit lanes on hyde street that you just approved last month, the geary boulevard. quick build improvements which are nearly complete now, the 28 19th avenue muni forward project, which added transit bulbs and other upgrades on 19th avenue, is now substantially complete at 27 bryant muni forward project, which also added a significant number of bulbs and the tenderloin and nob hill neighborhoods, russian hill, a queue jump bus lane for the 30 stockton on townsend street and red transit lane colorization on mission street in soma. so that's just in the last few months. some of the projects we've completed. and you we also have seven projects that are

currently in the detailed design or construction phase. so these are projects that are already approved but are kind of in the detailed design or construction phase. you can see that we expect construction to wrap up soon on the 22 fillmore on 16th street. that's just about done. and we expect construction to be completed next year on five fulton bulbs in the inner richmond and the taraval muni forward project and we expect construction to occur from about 2025 to 2027 and beyond. on the sort of permanent version of some projects that already have had quick builds. so the church muni forward 29 sunset phase one project and the geary boulevard improvement project, permanent version. so i'll send it back to sean for the rest of it. great. thank you, michael. so just what is coming up next in the near term? we are really focusing on the rail system in the near term. michael will be coming back up in a few minutes. we have an info item on the m that will be in your next item. we're also hoping to bring forward the k ingleside work that we've been

working closely with. supervisor melgar's office on ocean. we're we're hoping in the january to february time frame for that project that and then we'll be shifting staff resources to those, those next five bullets you see there. most notably the t third that as you know, does have a transit line. so a lot of a lot of dedicated right of way. but, you know, it needs a lot of help still. so we'll be focusing on there. and we do also hope to be leaning heavily on some of our international colleagues on figuring out how some other cities around the world really are dealing with the kind of things we're seeing on the on the t third line as we improve that corridor and then, of course, the j church, the portion of noe valley is on there and the n judah, why we're focusing so much on the rail in the next year, year and a half is because we're also working our long range arm of our group is working on a muni metro modernization project that's really focusing on the subway and, you know, we you know, the

subway will only be as good as what's coming into it, right? so you got to fix the subway, but you also got to got to address bus problems and delays and issues on the surface as well. so it'll all work together as as one one system. so that leaves us to it leads us rather to the what is the vision and the vision here as actually laid out in the connect work, we call this the five minute network. it's really obviously a service service vernacular, but this really is a capital map. we are marrying, of course, as we've kind of been talking about the service and the capital sides of the house. and so while we're talking about five minute service on these red corridors, that also means that the vision is that these these these busses and trains are only stopping at transit stops. they're going to be hopefully a surface level subway is what what the vision is. and you know, this is obviously going to take take a while. so that's why we're not promising this in the next few

years. but we are going to be advancing toward this idea, which means we're going to be going back to many of the corridors that we've already done moving forward projects on to get even hopefully more improvements on those corridors and eventually reach toward this idea of just stopping at transit stops on these on these major routes. so that's where we're at. and i'd love to take any questions or comments. thank you so much. colleagues, are there questions for the presenters. so go ahead. see here. that's good. this is a really great presentation. it sounds like it's amazing. we did a lot of great thing and it's well fitting, like happy thanksgiving, you know? and i am looking at your pie chart on like the community priorities for sfmta for the next upcoming fiscal two years of 22 and

2,614. well are you going to go back to the slide? yeah okay. let me pull it up. yeah. so the second highest priorities are, you know, 14% of them identify that personal safety for muni riders. i would love to hear what we have in your in your pipeline, how we can address the second priorities of from the communities. that's great. so the couple couple answers there one from from within my group and within my cip program we've started a lighting program at stops. so, you know, one of the issues is that that people feel when they're waiting at stops, when it's when it's darker out, very unsafe. it's just not a great feeling to be in a dark, dark locale. so we have some money set aside in our cip. we're doing a pilot program of that on the line that that michael will talk about here in a minute. where we're we're practicing, we're there's not

lighting at a lot of these stops for a lot of a lot of really legitimate reasons, you know dollar reasons, you know how much is it going to cost? can we look at other alternatives like like solar lighting? can we can we can we do things that don't necessarily mean running conduit , you know, five, 600ft? that cost costs a lot of money. so we are going to be doing this pilot on the m line to see if there's other ways that we can get some lighting at stops. we also have a bus stop program that we're kind of brushing off all of our bus stop signage throughout the system. that includes a little what we call a birdhouse on the top of the signs that have some ambient lighting. not enough lighting that you can read a book by, but they are solar powered and do hopefully give off a little bit of lighting to at least let operators know that there's a there's a stop there and then there's a whole nother program that kim burris and the safety team is working on, trying to improve personal safety on on the bus itself. so there's a couple of different

levels we're working on on the street level as well as on the on the bus side. thank you for that. and yeah, i'd like to hear a little bit more about what kim is also in charge of doing because it's really important for every one of us to feel safe in the bus and getting off the bus. yeah. um, but i realized that you and michael are more focused on the actual infrastructure aspect of the muni forward project. so let me share with you some of the senior hours or seniors and also a little older adult riders that they've been telling me that they wish that they can see the digital sign for upcoming busses because they are very reluctant to take their phone out in public these days because of the worry of their personal safety. waiting at a even a very well

lit bus stop and do you have any updates on that progress? yes. so i do not. jeff, do you have any we would be delighted to give you. we're probably past due for an update from our chief of security, kimberly burris, talking about the gender safety equity initiative, as well as what we're doing with technology, with our transit ambassadors and with our fare inspectors. and we're probably also due for an update on technology, including the replacement of all of our real time information panels as the first phase of that work, as well as the next phases of that work, which we are eager to fund. because not only does that information help people who are afraid of taking out their phone, just the mere presence of that information actually helps to increase confidence for all riders just as improvements in

speed and reliability. we hear from our passengers a lot that the greatest concerns that they have have are on our lower frequency and less reliable lines because you're standing there and you don't know when the next bus is coming and that's when our riders get very nervous. so when you can see the next bus coming, that provides a great deal of reassurance for our passengers is great looking forward to see those presentations. then thank you. thank you. director hensley, please add thank you again for this presentation. thank you again for the presentation. every your team is doing great work. i just had a couple of questions. um one is not really related to muni forward, but it's in your purview. i know. so, um, prior to the pandemic, you all had like a hotspot program for like, stop immediate

, quick build type improvements that were less slightly less intensive than, um, muni forward. um, i know your group is very busy, but is that still a thing? um you did like the ten hotspots or. yeah i forget what it was, but yeah, that's, that's a great memory. yes, we, we, we did the ten hotspots. it was based on just overall delay. so you know, the muni forward program is really focused on where the most passengers are and thus the most aggregate delay. but we also wanted to look at where just busses in general or trains in general were getting stuck regardless of ridership. and it was really our way to address some of the some of the lower frequency, you know, lower ridership lines, like things like the 54, the 52, the 37. and so we did the initial top ten list. those have all been implemented. those those improvements have been are

on the ground now. and we are in the process right now of developing a next or another top ten list that we will be taking up in this in this fiscal year coming up. so that program is ongoing and then there'll there'll be more on that'll be also more on the community lines . yes, long lines. i'm assuming. okay, great. and then michael's, um, sort of timeline slide inspired a question for me is these larger sort of capital projects that we're approving along with a quick build phase, are like are the capital portions of those projects, are they funded or or are you still looking for funding for those all of those projects on that slide are funded? okay. we, you know, detailed design just takes

takes a while. but yes, we have all of the all of those are funded and are ready to go from a funding standpoint. again, can can congratulations the nice nice item for us to go into the holiday with thank you madam chair. thank you vice chair kahina please. um, first off, congratulations, owens, on your anniversary. sean, i'm glad that you've been with us for ten years, and thank you for all your work in these past ten years. um i. i loved seeing the 14 numbers. i'm an avid 14 and 14 are specific writer, so it was great to see all the numbers there. um, i did have a question on a lot of our red lines tend to be in on commercial corridors and so a lot of community members there often cite that the red lanes are impacting business and they've seen a

decrease in business activity and a lot of, you know, vacancies arising. and there's usually this like argument that there's a causality between in redlands and business. s so i just was wondering if you all have done some analysis on that and if you do want to take some time to share, if you have done some analysis on that, what that has resulted in, we've done some analysis, you know, tax tax numbers are a little bit lagging behind. you actual implementation and ridership numbers and things like that. but we have looked, for example, on the l, we had a lot of reports of people saying that their business was was lower. so we looked at business close rates. we also looked at overall tax revenue because it's been long enough now that we've that we've got some numbers is actually the close rates on taraval were less than the city as a whole you know even though of course to those individual businesses that that was still impactful and tax rates were about about what we were seeing

on citywide. so you know, we didn't see any any cause causation there. but know that's just one corridor we got. we got to continue to look at that. and that's one of the things, you know, i talked about in a couple of months. it's technically march that muni returns ten. but sometime in this fiscal year, we're hoping to get before or after project put together. looking back at the last ten years of muni forward, both from a benefit and also lessons learned and standpoint. and that will include a look at tax numbers on on those major corridors. so we do we do hope within the next year to have something out that that speaks to that directly. i would definitely encourage that analysis to occur in the mission district specifically because i do think that a lot of the narrative out there that there is this causality between redlands and business activity, reduced business activity along commercial corridors, creates this fear factor for a lot of folks. and implementing redlands in their respect of

neighborhoods. so i think it's a worthwhile effort to just, you know, see if there's any truth to that. and what we can do to support business as if that is, in fact an impact that we're having. um the other piece i was going to touch on is as a avid 14, our writer, um, there is a lot of double parking in the mission district and so i do wonder, you know, when we do have these dedicated lanes, um, we don't oftentimes have capacity to, you know, have enforcement and ensure that they're actually clear for, for our busses to pass through. and so i just wanted to see like what work effort your team is thinking about to, to you know, address that challenge. if you're seeing that as a as a huge challenge or not. and yeah, just get your thoughts on that. we are and cathy one of my one of my staff is here is put together a really great program

for that very for that very issue. we're looking at a couple of different things, both education wise. so we've got some new stickers that are going on the backs of busses that say cameron force that will be going up and down basically on every bus in our system. of course, only only actually is where there's transit lanes, but also cape brian's great work to get, you know, camera enforcement on our transit lanes themselves. it used to be only double parking. it's moving into, you know, actually vehicles blocking the transit lane and then we you know, we are also working with the pco, sean mccormick and his group to make that a little bit more of an upgrade. the technology and make it a little bit more of a easier process. right now we have two pco's that sit in a small room and review tape all day long and where we're seeing double parking not the not the most efficient way to do things. so with the new cameras that we're getting, we're in the test period right

now on these new cameras and it takes pictures so the pco's can go right to the spot where the camera thinks somebody was violating the red lane. and then the pco pco's actually make the call. if it's if it if it did or didn't, because the camera can pick up some other stuff. but but that's going to greatly reduce the amount of time and effort that it takes to give out, give out those those tickets. yeah i'm not encouraging a lot of tickets out there, but i just want to make sure that, you know, there functioning as as we're designing and it is interesting that you know most of the tickets that we give you know, i we have sean follow up with the exact number but a high percentage of those numbers are are associated with repeat offenders and it's groups or people that you know don't don't seem to mind if they get a ticket or or whatnot. you know delivery trucks you know fedex type things versus, you know, the individuals usually with an individual, we ticket them once and we don't see that much

repeat issues there. so thank you for that. the other thing i would love to see in a future for presentation is the operator perspective on how these different, uh, treatments are actually functioning from them, from like their, their experience out. and i bring up the fortuner again, avid writer and also i had the opportunity to speak to some operators there and they're like, i was like, well, so how effective is this red line here? they're like, yeah, it's hit or miss because there's tons of cars in the middle of the lane, so it doesn't really, you know, you still have to swerve and you still have to do all these things. so we'd love to see their perspective on like how the implementation is working out and what they're seeing from, you know, any areas of improvement that they would see from their perspective. again, they're the ones that are actively on these lanes. so we'd love to see what they have to say about it. yeah that's great. we, you know, we meet with them once a month at division one safety meetings. so we get a lot

of that feedback as well. but we should package it and make sure we get. thank you. sounds good. thank you. yeah, i just want to thank you for sharing this sort of progression of where we've been and also just where we're going. i really, really love the vision slide because it helps people to understand what all these little pieces kind of add up to this bigger, bigger vision . so i think the only question i have for you is really just like, how, how what's it going to take? how far are we from realizing this, this vision? and what are sort of the big what are the big barriers? yeah, there's a lot of barriers from technology. you know, signal that's one of the reasons that we want to look at some of our international peers to figure out how better how we can modify how we do our signal timing to better take advantage of, of that. you know, when we when you look at delay for on average on

a corridor, you know, you get like 10, 12% of signal delay. another, you know, 3 to 5% used to be crowding. but now that we've we do all board boarding and that's really helped reduce the dwell time delay. but then just the random like congestion and like we were talking about just the competing for space with loading and with no, you know, just double parking and people trying to trying to find parking spots and bike lanes and, you know, pedestrian scrambles all those things eat into the travel time. so i the vision is laid out there because you've got to have a vision. if we can ever get to that vision. there's a lot of both. i think policy of obstacles as well as technology obstacles to get there. but i think laying out the vision helps us start knocking off some of those and finding solutions to some of those issues. and that's why it's kind of a longer term vision versus a shorter term, a

shorter term reality. so we're going to we're going to keep bringing you stuff and hopefully we can we can keep pushing the envelope and eventually get there. yeah. and just thank you. this was this was so instructive. just looking at this like 12 corridors is two thirds of all of our ridership that it's sort of this interesting corollary to of course, the vision zero high injury network, where it's just like a small percentage, right. covers a huge part of the challenge. so i feel like we should all have those 12 lines memorized. i don't know which ones they are, but that's really , really helpful to focus on. focus us in on sort of where the majority of our ridership is taking place. okay. are there any other questions from colleagues on the presentation? if none, we'll go to public comment. please for anyone in the room. my board members. luke bornheimer first, i just want to thank michael, sean, julie,

director tomlin for all their work on muni forward. it's, it's really great to see and i think riders really appreciate it and it helps move our city towards a more sustainable future. um i have a few notes. it would be great to see more quick billed bus boarding islands. i know that takes funding, but seeing those for example, like along the 22 on fillmore i think would really help to speed up the 22 and also discourage people from driving on fillmore and getting in the way of the 20 to be great to see that across the city and i think voters would support that because it would make the bus move faster, signal timing. it would be great to see it on both holding green lights and preemption. i was on the van the other day, got caught at a red light kind of unnecessarily. there's no bus stop there, so it'd be great to see those improvements made at brt and on the rest of the transit only lanes, there was talk about enforcement. it would be great to see separation of the transit only lanes. so right now it's a

lot of just like good faith you know it's either red paint or white paint. it'd be great to see posts curbs. we have bus lane curbs or even diverters at certain intersections to just get people off of the streets right now it's just too much good faith and people are just not following the rules, including on mission. as far as camera enforcement, i think sean was alluding to ab 917 it would be great to see that ramped up, but definitely infrastructure is needed. and then as far as the business impacts, it'd be great to see the agency look to new york city. new york city has done a lot of stuff around transit only lanes, and maybe they've done a bunch of business impact studies. not that san franciscans always like to believe other cities. and then as far as safety, i think increased ridership is also great for safety. and so this would encourage that. and finally, i think i would encourage the agency to lean on prop j supporters. prop j prop l supporters are really correlated and i think we can use those folks to pass measures. thank

you. any other commenters in the room? okay. please go to remote at this time. we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a total time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderator our first speaker, this is herbert weiner. one elephant in the room is the need for more expansion of the fleet. you need a net addition of vehicles, whether they be in the undergrad and or on the surface because this is a growing popular option with growing needs. when you have more vehicles, you have more frequency of service. and i think a lot of the money is really being wasted on the structural improvements like eliminating bus stops and other other things like that where you if you had more busses, you would have more frequency of

transportation. there would be less crowding and it would be a much more efficient service and you could do it at the same cost as the as removing bus stops and making all these alterations. so you must take this into consideration. other wise it will perennially have the same problem. thank you. thank you. next speaker. good evening. board this is cyrus hall. i'm calling in today representing a faster, safer gary we recently fought for the approval of the gary boulevard improvement project and we want to thank the agency for quickly following through and delivering the project on a tight timeline on the new transit lane will help transit riders for many years to come and we're excited to see the pedestrian improvements continue to develop. i want to emphasize slide three somewhat in opposition to the last caller and staff's presentation on congestion, increasing operation costs and the opportunity we have to paint more streets red is a relatively cheap option to

provide wide benefits for riders and is going to save on operational costs associated with running the same frequency of service. this allows us to make maximum use of our limited operating budget additional steps to speed up the deployment of red lane should be pursued if available. i also want to note that while quick builds have been very successful for the agency and muni, ford has been a successful program. project integration with other city departments can be a struggle and is a point for continued improvement on gary. other agencies were unable and unready to adjust the positioning of the seated covered bus stops, leaving riders unsure where to board busses. this was also a critical part of getting signal timings right. further improvement and cross cross-department coordination is vital as we accelerate these projects and i encourage the board and the agency to continue to investigate how we can better integrate in terms of timing and delivery. thank you. thank you.

no additional speakers. thank you, secretary silva. we will now close public comment. can you please call the next item? very good places you on. item number 13 present motion and discussion regarding the ocean view transit and safety project. okay good afternoon, directors. once again, michael rhodes, transit priority manager for sfmta and today i'm giving an informational update on the ocean view transit and safety project, which is part of the muni forward program. and we

hope to bring the final project proposal for you for your consideration in january. but today we'll be sharing a preview of what's included and seeking your feedback and direction as we seek to finalize the proposals. we don't usually bring an informational item like this prior to approval, but this project has had a very community driven approach to, you know, design from the very start. and we want to make sure we have time to work through any remaining design and outreach questions while also getting your input as we head towards the final stage of planning. so the ocean view, transit and safety project is moving forward. capital project on the line and the ocean view that aims to improve reliability. customer experience, accessibility and traffic safety as well. all the project area is the line in the ocean view neighborhood, so that's basically from the intersection of 19th avenue and uniprocessor

boulevard down to balboa park station along the so long streets like san jose avenue, broad street, orizaba randolph and a section of 19th avenue, not the state highway section of 19th avenue, but the section that's in the ocean view neighborhood. and the project does not look at sections of the line outside of the ocean view like parkmerced or sf state or stonestown or west portal avenue. these areas will be evaluated separately through the muni metro modernization study. the project would benefit 18,000 daily riders on the ocean view and it supports the muni service equity strategy. since the mta is an equity strategy line and the ocean view neighborhood is an equity strategy neighborhood. so broadly speaking, there's sort of three main challenges that the ocean view, the ocean view corridor faces within the neighborhood of the ocean view. there's sort of reliability and customer experience issues. so there's frequent stop signs. there's a lot of flag stops or

stops that don't have any kind of boarding facilities. there are closely spaced stops in some cases and just general congestion in some locations that can add to the delay. and in general, transit stops in many cases, they basically lack sort of basic amenities in terms of safety. the project area is on the city's high injury network. many stops require riders to board in the street, as i mentioned, and ten people have been hit in the past five years, just sort of getting off the train. so not not to mention all the other pedestrian injuries. that's that's people stepping off the train. as far as accessibility, there are long gaps on this corridor still between wheelchair accessible stops. as i mentioned earlier, we've sought to bring in a very community driven approach to outreach on this project. so starting in spring summer of 2022, we began an initial public outreach phase that was really sort of a community listening tour. there were no proposals yet at this stage. we just went

out to the community and we met residents, riders and merchants. where they're at. we held a survey to identify community priorities for addressing transportation issues. along the corridor. we heard from about 270 survey respondents and a majority of the people we heard from were people of color. and 23% of the responses that we got were provided in chinese in summer and fall of 2022. we shared initial high level concepts that sought to address the top priorities that people had identified in the first phase of outreach. so these weren't detailed proposals, but rather kind of general concepts for where we could do things like improve safety at stops or improve travel time through stop spacing changes, for instance. but it's not sort of down to the foot level. here's exactly where boarding island might be or how long it might be in spring of this year, we shared the first round of detailed proposals based on feedback we'd heard during the conceptual phase, and we gathered more public feedback to further refine the proposals that we presented. and at this stage people could see exactly how transit, how long a transit

bulb might be. for instance, or exactly where we might be proposing crosswalks with continental striping or all the kind of fine details came out at that point. and finally this summer, most recently in fall, we've shared revised proposals again that you know, had had feedback incorporated from that last round again. and we held a public hearing and we briefed stakeholders to gather additional feedback. so there's been multiple rounds and really even the first round reflected priorities that we'd identified through kind of an open listening tour of the community. and now we're just about ready to bring a proposal to the mta board for approval and review. but as i mentioned earlier, there's at least one key location where we're continuing to work with community members to finalize the design. and here's what we've heard so far throughout the outreach process. during the initial listening tour, the number one thing we heard from survey respondents is that muni service should be faster and more reliable, consistent with the survey results, we saw citywide that was the priority for responses here to that was about two

thirds of responses. put that as their top priority and a quarter of respondents also said their top issue was that transit stops don't feel safe for pedestrians or that they lack basic accessibility and, you know, other basic amenities. we also heard consistently that there are issues with speeding on san jose avenue, kind of similar to the j church portion of san jose avenue. we heard that small businesses and other community institutions need parking and loading options for people to access the corridor. and we heard that stunt driving is a problem at times. on randolph and broad. not typically something we seek to address with muni forward, but we were listening and we heard that that was one of the community issues that was identified as we began to share our initial concepts, we did hear feedback that removing train stops at some locations would specifically orizaba and broad would affect a future access to a future library location. that's proposed there. so we said, okay, we're going to revise that to take that into account. what we heard concerns that proposed traffic signals could lead to speeding. we also heard some

additional feedback specific to the transit stop near the salvation army. first nation corps location on 19th avenue that i'll speak to a little bit more later on and i'll speak to some of the changes that we made based on the feedback a little later in the presentation on. so here's a summary of what we're proposing with the current proposal. transit lanes on san jose avenue from broad to niagara to reduce speeding and to improve transit reliability, there's a lot of excess roadway capacity right now. so it's really as much as anything kind of a road diet benefit. there are proposed wider sidewalks and boarding islands at 15 train stops along the corridor to provide a safer loading experience. as we're proposing wheelchair accessible ramps at four stops to enhance accessibility, we're proposing transit, stop consolidation at three locations to reduce, delay and create more even regular stop spacing. we're also proposing safety elements like bulb outs, refuge islands, stop signs, daylighting continental crosswalks and other features to

just generally improve walking safety on this corridor. so this map summarizes the parking changes that would result from the project improvement. it's as you can see, there would be 75 spaces removed in total across the corridor, which represents about 6% of the overall parking supply within a block of the project area, about 94% of spaces would be retained. most of this parking removal is directly tied to safety improvements. that is pretty much all of them. as the table at the bottom here kind of shows, you can list out what the benefit of each element is and how many spaces that would require removing to improve safety or accessibility or whatever the benefit is. and actually the only element that's pure transit reliability is stop consolidation, which actually increases the parking supply. so as you can see, it's a safety and reliability that's sort of accounts for the lion's share of the changes in parking. and one other important note is that the majority of parking changes or

impacts are concentrated at sort of outside of the commercial core of the of the project area. so the greatest removal is at the ends of the project area and at the broad san jose intersection, which these are generally not the commercial hubs of, of this project area, although there are still some key parking needs, especially on the 19th avenue section and some other locations. so to help mitigate the parking impacts, we did a curb use survey with merchants that helped us identify solution such as loading zones that would help ensure businesses and other institutions have their needs met for parking and loading. we've also proposed to add back parking through angled parking and other measures wherever feasible near the project area. community feedback has shaped the project in many ways, both in terms of the original concepts that we presented and in the revisions that we've made over the past year and more. so first, we've sought to keep parking wherever possible. this has meant proposing shorter transit bulbs in some cases as

long as passengers won't be stepping into an active travel lane. so we might propose a shorter transit bulb as long as it's a parking lane there instead of a travel lane, but still trying to at least cover the first car of the train. we've proposed special intersection treatments to help reduce stunt driving at randolph on randolph at head in victoria. we've implemented or we're proposing traffic signal timing that would maximize safety for people walking and we're considering making the two proposed signals all red, kind of flashing all red at night. so they basically function as stop signs when there's not as much transit service running and when there's not as much traffic. and you might see more issues with speeding. we're also keeping and upgrading transit stops at orizaba broad and bright randolph that were originally proposed for consolidation and we also have adjusted some of the proposed stop locations to better serve key community institutions and to preserve parking where it's needed the most by businesses, especially along 19th avenue. we are specifically reducing the transit bulb length that's proposed near the buckman center and. providing a passenger

loading zone there to sort of better meet their needs. that came up during the outreach process and we're also looking to accommodate loading at the salvation all nation core location while upgrading the stops as is currently proposed. so we've made several other changes to the project, adding bulbs, more bulbs and adding other pedestrian safety features. several other changes. i won't list all of them, but just to know that that project has evolved quite a bit through the outreach process. so just briefly, just we'll mention that the project does, in addition to the in addition to sort of basic transport features, we are looking to incorporate safety enhancements like and customer experience enhancements. this this could be things like lighting the lighting pilot that sean mentioned, which will help us improve the sense of security. it stops potentially incorporating landscaping, seating and shelters as other elements will ensure that the

project meets a broader range of community needs. and in terms of the details of those proposals, that's something we will work out in close collaboration with community during the detailed design phase of the project in addition to the overview that i mentioned, i wanted to highlight three key locations where we're proposing the most extensive upgrades on the corridor. so first, this is the intersection of broad and san jose. we heard a lot of feedback about this intersection during the listening tour phase of our project outreach. the goal of this proposal, this intersection is to transfer from this intersection from a freeway style off ramp to more of a walking friendly design. we're proposing new pedestrian bulbs and refuge islands to help reduce crossing distances and slow traffic. we're also proposing a new stop sign for the northbound san jose avenue direction to aid pedestrians and also trains because trains actually have to stop and oncoming traffic doesn't right now. so we're looking to correct that by making it a four way stop sign here. at the end

result should be a great improvement overall for safety here. another key location is at the terminal, stops on san jose near geneva avenue, right by the balboa park station. this intersection has been the subject of planning and studies for years and has been a community priority for upgrades for a long, long time. we know and as you can see in the photos here, the existing stops lack safe boarding areas for, you know, all the train doors for the last outbound stop and for some of the train doors for the inbound stop. in addition, the existing wheelchair accessible stops here are one of them, is sort of very inconveniently located. and the other direction, it's not reliable. it's mechanical and it breaks down all the time. so we're looking to provide a more convenient and reliable wheelchair ramp option as well. so it's been quite a design challenge to fit all of the features that we want to fit into this intersection and it's a busy, constrained zone, but this proposal should meet those needs, we think and greatly

improve conditions for people accessing the line. and that is especially important we think right now because there's a brand new affordable housing development that just is sort of being completed right now or just completed on san jose at this intersection at the southwest corner of geneva. so this these stops are really going to better serve that new community and all the existing riders there. so finally, along the 19th avenue section of the project area, the west end of the project corridor, just before sarah, sarah, we're seeking to address another of the most challenging issues with the current line service. so as you can see in the photo here, the existing inbound 19th avenue stop at sarah does not have a boarding platform at all and passengers are boarding right into a lane of traffic, not just a parking lane, but an active turn lane for vehicles. so drivers there are eager to get through the traffic signal and get onto the state highway portion of 19th avenue up ahead or onto junipero serra boulevard. and people have been hit here. and we've heard from

riders and muni operators that improvements are urgently, urgently needed. the outbound stop also lacks a boarding island. people board into a parking lane. so to address these issues, we're proposing to relocate the stops a block to the south and upgrade them with transit boarding islands. a bike lane would also be included since this part of 19th avenue is a bike route that connects the two sf state and to daly city, bart and due to the very limited geometry and the heavy traffic kind of at the existing stop locations, it wasn't possible to upgrade the stops in their existing locations. so we've sought to keep them as close to the original locations as possible while having the room to do these upgrades. we're also proposing to include wheelchair accessible ramps to help fill a lengthy gap in the accessible stops right here. and we've you know, we've heard a lot of support and a lot of urgency for upgrading the inbound stop in particular. but we've also heard concerns about some of the potential parking impacts with this specific

proposals, especially the relocation of the inbound stop to block south or so given the location of driveways and the short blocks here and other challenges, we're pretty limited in where we could place this upgraded inbound stop in particular. but we did want to share some of the feedback we've heard with the board and provide an opportunity for discussion on and just provide, provide you a little bit of an update on the different options and trade offs and a little bit of what we're looking at with the different proposals. so on this slide, we're showing three potential designs for the inbound stop on 19th avenue. first, there's the current proposal, which we already saw that would place the stop immediately in front of the salvation army on 19th avenue, just south of sergeant street. so that's on the left of the three proposals there. this salvation army location is a church and a service provider. it's not a store, but it you know, it has a lot of active

services throughout the week. and our proposal includes adding loading zones to meet the sort of drop off and access needs. but it does put a boarding island sort of throughout out most of the length of their street frontage on that block. they you know, the folks at salvation army have shared concerns about having a transit stop in front of their facilities in general. and we've also concerns about losing most of the parking on their block. they do have a dedicated parking lot to the north of sergeant on 19th avenue, but they've noted that they do have pretty extensive parking demand at times during services and the services that they provide. under the first proposal, eight out of nine parking spaces on that block would be removed and one blue zone accessible parking space would be retained on the south end. alternatively there's sort of two other variants we could shorten the boarding island to be the length of one car instead of a two car train. technically, the passengers in the second car would step off

into a parking lane, not a travel lane. but the lane here is pretty wide. so, you know, there's some risk of a car bike kind of trying to squeeze past. if we don't have the full length island here, it's still a huge improvement over the current location where you're stepping off into an active travel lane, of course. and since the current location is two lanes, this one's one. it's an improvement in this scenario, the wheelchair stop would have to be located separately, probably north of beverly, and this would preserve for two five parking spaces instead of just one on the block. and finally, on the right, there's an option where we don't build any boarding island at the new stop location. this is the least good in terms of safety and accessibility, although it's certainly still a major improvement over the current stop. we'd still daylight the front of the stop, so there would be some parking removal, but just about one space and we really wouldn't recommend this design given the trade offs for safety and accessibility that it entails, especially given the resolution telling us to eliminate the treatment of flag stops. but we did want to share this option

since it does have the least parking impact. and finally, we we've also been in discussion with salvation army representatives about just in the last few days about this concept of could we move the stop farther south and maybe sort of block the next intersection with the train stop and have a short boarding island ? the second car would actually be hanging out into the monticello intersection. so we don't really recommend that that necessarily unless we completely shut down monticello. and there's sort of circulation concerns with doing that and feel liability questions. but we did want to share that. that was something that has been brought up. so we're sharing all of this detail to hopefully get the board's kind of high level feedback and direction, maybe not an inch by inch discussion about it, but at least kind of at the high level of how you think we should approach this and what to prioritize near this intersection ahead of bringing this back to you. hopefully for a final vote in january for the whole project. but in the meantime, we will be continuing to work closely with salvation

army folks and try to accommodate their needs as best as possible in this proposal, but instead of just waiting till january, we did want to share an update and sort of get at least your kind of high level feedback on this. so wrapping up or the next steps look like today, informational item giving you this update outreach continues january bringing this project for a vote. hopefully spring quick build of the initial improvements, detailed design over the next couple of years and then full construction in 2026 to 2028. but again, trying to get many of the benefits as soon as this spring, this is the package that you will be voting on essentially in the coming months. and you know, that's that's pretty much the update. thank you, directors. we're happy to answer any questions today. we look forward to getting your input on the project and work towards work towards finalizing this last key piece of the proposed design. thank you so much. vice chair kahina. um, i'm excited about this project for many reasons. i

think this is a commercial corridor that has really wanted this level of investment for a long period of time and it's so great to be able to be to serve on this board and be in a place, in a position to be able to give this sort of investment to this neighborhood that desperately needs it just for context, for my colleagues to better understand what this corridor is like and some of the challenges that it has had. it is a corridor that has pockets of commercial activity throughout it. it's not a commercial corridor that, you know, it's not as robust as ocean avenue or or the mission street excelsior corridor, but it is one that has had a lot of i would say, community power to really activate it for a long period of time. and there are certain intersections that have had a lot of intervention from infested neighborhoods, from other different departments in the city to support it and to make sure that beautification

projects happen and all these different things. so. there's a couple of things that i'm noting in this particular project that i have questions about. some are around the bookends. so on the geneva to san jose side, michael's right. there's a new development there that just went up. it's now the ribbon cutting ceremony happened. it's up and running and it's a beautiful sight. right? 100% affordable housing, a huge collaboration with bart occurred in that space to improve the bart plaza location. um it is a place where a lot of folks, you know, start their, you know, their trips on bart and oftentimes, you know, a lot of folks there isn't a parking structure around there so and this neighborhood is very car centric. and so a lot of folks do park adjacent or near the balboa park station to drop

their cars off and then be able to take transit from there. um, so i see the loss of parking here and it gives me a little bit of a concern on i'm just to knowing how the community uses this space and knowing how they use the parking facilities that are currently there right now. but i agree it is a design challenge. it's a bit of a mess there for many reasons. um, and it is challenging for transit riders to be able to take to board the muni, to board muni and whether it's the bus or a train, it's been challenging for some time. um, so i'm curious to see like what the conversation has been with the community on the loss of parking there and, and really trying to understand what the discussion has been in some of the solutions that have popped up in that particular section in just again, i just know that a lot of folks really park and ride in that that area.

and that's how they use it. so i'm curious about that. the other part that i'm just super enthusiastic about is the broad san jose interchange there, because i do again, that's another tricky intersection and i'm glad that there's going to be a four way stop there. it's been needed for some time. so i think that's great. um i am interested in understanding you mentioned like this, this project could be an opportunity to also integrate some public realm improvements. i'm wondering if those are funded in the project or if this is something where you'd have to collaborate with another department or just want to understand that piece of it because there have like what i don't want folks to members of the community to expect to see public realm improvements as part of the project and then get disappoint when we're just, you know, implementing some of our infrastructure improvements around transit. so that piece as well. but yes, if you could

answer to those three questions as specifically around the geneva san jose intersection, the public realm improvements and just understanding a little bit more on what the appetite has been on from the community on the loss of parking, because i know that's that's something that this community in particular is going to feel really, really strongly against. yeah thank you, director. so in terms of the geneva san jose area overall, we've heard pretty strong support for the improvements. i think there's an understanding that excuse me, that, you know, it's just an area where there's been this long standing need and the parking impact is significant at that location. but i think everything we've heard working with community members there has been overall supportive. we have designed it in a way that

provides the key benefits with as little parking impact as you can manage. and even some of the adjustments to it preserve more of the parking that's closest to balboa park station, just through sort of reconfigure ing some of the design at the same time, those changes have probably benefited the project overall. so i think luckily we were able to find a design that is best from an accessibility standpoint, best from a transit rider standpoint and does the least to remove parking. but there's no avoiding that there, is there is, you know, significant amount of parking impact. but i would say we have not at that particular location, heard a great deal of concern. we've heard it more kind of right in front of merchant locations along the corridor in general, as far as the public realm improvements, i think some basic public realm improvements should be able to be addressed within the project. the lighting pilot that i mentioned is funded through a separate a separate pilot program at the same time, if we get into detail design and

we're having community conversations where people want things that are beyond what we can fund, then i think we would take initiative as a project to do everything we can to try to make that happen. but it probably l taraval is a good example of the kind of basic sort of landscaping customer experience elements that we've been able to incorporate into the first phase of that. and it looks great if you've been out to taraval street, the boarding islands are not just a slabs of concrete. there architecturally nice and have some landscaping elements. so at a minimum, i think that level would be something we can incorporate with the current budget. then a follow up question i had because because again, this corridor has pockets of commercial activity and i understand that we're going to integrate transit only lanes as part of the project. have there been some strong feelings from the community about opposing the transit only lanes along the commercial corridor or like just if you can give me a sense of what the

community response has been, that'd be great. sure. yeah. so the transit lanes are only proposed on san jose avenue, which in this segment is like 100% residential all so we really haven't had any concern about it. it's such a low volume street for the width of the street. left turns are still allowed. there's no kind of business impact or business access issues, so it, you know, it can be a it can be something that's a point of discussion with projects. but in this case, it has not been a concern that we've heard. okay. and in terms of i hear you wanting guidance from us on the three different options that you have there. and i, i would honestly defer to your work with the community to understand what's best for folks there. um, i think it's important to try to there are a lot of seniors in this

neighborhood as well. and so i, i do want to prioritize the resources that ensure that they still have close proximity to a lot of the resources along the corridor. and it seems like this particular intersection is one of those that converge a lot of different resource hubs for folks. and so we'll defer to staff and community to work it out. and so i but i, i hope that in the discussions, um, we do communicate to the community how important it is for seniors to also to safely board the transit as well. um, and that that's not lost in the discussion. so that's, i guess it's not really a lot of clear direction on it, but just wanted to give you my, my sense of how you all should tackle it. thank you. vice chair

karina, director. so, and kensi, i see your hands are raised also. so we have a number of members of the public who would like to comment on this item. so if that's okay with you, i'd like to go to public comment now, hear from the public, and then we can have further discussion of the board. please please go ahead and approach the podium. if you'd like to comment on this item. oh, good evening, madam chair and mta directors. my name is jeannie tam. i have been a member of the salvation army church for 35 years and i am currently on the church corps council and i have with me we had our senior pastor who had to leave and we have our assistant pastor and we have some members here as you could tell, we're not board meeting savvy because we've been here since 1:00, even though we knew our agenda was last. so our i understand that the proposal proposal is to do a

accommodate two different stops near us and to make that into one right in front of our church entrance is it's literally just a few yards away from our front door. we are called td center for worship and service. we are registered 150 member church wednesday evenings, sunday mornings we gather, and it's already at parking challenge for us on the picture looked like they are partial cross street looked much bigger. it's only ten spots a parcel so we already have to look for scatter to look for other parking spots within the streets. and we call our service service center because we service our our local low income families. we serve as weekly food pantry where 70 people, individuals line up to pick up their groceries and we have clothing drive on wednesdays. we have women coming to pick up their clothes from our room full of clothing. at and seasonal programs like

summer bible school programs for youth, youth. and we have back to school backpack handing out backpacks an angel tree and christmas and we're they pick up we so as you can see we can we have constant flow of people coming in to register and sign up for things. we have constant flow of loading, unloading supplies. so at our front door entrance is the primary access pause for one minute. that is your time. however, are you speaking on behalf of a number of. yes, i am. there's only maybe two people behind me who's going to speak. is that all right? if we allow additional time, if she's speaking on behalf of other people? if you have, i'm almost done. yeah. if you have questions for the speaker, she can respond to any. okay okay. so taking away even a small percentage of parking will really have huge impact for our daily operation. and we do understand and appreciate the objective of this project, which for the safety and writing enhanced ridership enhancement.

however we and we're grateful for these additional alternate lives, but we would please would like to ask if you could possibly move the stop to any other block or and again, it's literally an important impairment of our daily operations loading, unloading passengers. we do have many few handicapped persons who have to really get off really in front of our door instead of walking halfway. block thank you for your time. thank you. are there additional speakers in the room on this item? please go ahead. good evening. board my name is steve tam. i'm also with the san francisco all-nations core. i just wanted to elaborate that additionally to what jeannie had said. right. you know, we have a service. you know, we have a lot of numbers. right. but what she didn't say is that the access to our block right in that block,

if you compare to all other blocks, we have a continuous block on our side and as well as on the other side. on the other, on the opposite side of the street there aren't small spaces that you can never park a car, right? that's why you've got ten plus eight and then looks like another two based off of their current. that's 20 spaces, right ? that makes up over 26% of what they just indicated as the 75, 75 spaces throughout the whole line. right. so that's a major impact on us, right. but having access for the parents to drop off their youth or, you know, just for people have access, handicap access challenge, we need to have access on our side of the street at a minimum. right. for their safety. so i understand the stops that are necessary for the passengers, for the muni, but we also have to consider the safety of the community that comes to our

church for all the services and other things. right. so i did notice that, you know, on the powerpoint that we saw, there was only the proposal alternate one and two, alternative three, which was shown just now, which is showing the stop on the south end of the stop. that would in corrupt the monticello street. that's a very low usage street. right and but you know because our block is triangle, the two sides are very you know angled right having having a train stop there also prevents people from speeding down that hill. right. so you know, but the main point is the criticality of just maintaining our block on that side of the street. okay thank you for your time. thank you. additional speakers. good evening all for the directors.

and i am sorry you guys have to stay late. my name is chong park. i'm the pastor and i'm talking about the, you know, we have also a senior citizens over there and the handicapped and also children's. you guys have to consider that if they want to looking for safety, which is not good front of the church and parking not yes we do need parking but mostly important people who are able to walk. disability peoples. that's very important to walk through the think about it. you know, eventually they cannot walk. and especially i have a husband who have a 23 years and straw hemi paradise and he can walk and he can get out and i have to take him out. but he he loved to come to church, you know, so i was nearly abducted. so if they can

move to a different place, the stop different place, which is better also, they sierra and which they have last accident i also rejected the place because the stop sign is too short you know so that's why you know, cars are so speed way to come to 19 to 1 one i guess i would one that's the problem. another thing is that you know i've been research the trend not many people get out of their place only 2 or 3 people i've been such the seven days because of this. and you know they bike people. they don't have it. and i want you guys nearly survey again to move to another area to the parking space please if you

can. thank you. okay. thank you. thank you for your comment. any other speakers in the room on this item? no additional speakers. okay please open the remote comment at this time. we'll move to remote public comment not to exceed a time of ten minutes. members of the public wishing to comment should dial star three to enter the queue. each speaker will have two minutes. moderator first speaker is evening board. this is cyrus hall. i just want to voice my strong support for the ocean view transit and safety project. i've reviewed this project and communicated quite a bit with the agency and while i would love to have seen more two car islands, i think the agency has really made some some good and difficult decisions around balancing street geometries and community use decisions. but within that context, i want to strongly urge the agency to adopt the original proposal at 19th and randolph street, we do not often get opportunities to improve muni lines and passing

the opportunity to create a two car island for riders would be deeply unfortunate. shortening the island would force riders on the second car to step into the traffic lane. and while traffic should be slowing, if a train is in the stop, it would have to wait as they would have to wait for the train to clear. it still adds risks and difficult for riders removing the island entirely is wholly unacceptable. while we are struggling to make progress on vision zero and we must not miss this opportunity to remove a clear traffic hazard for riders, we need to be encouraging the use of public transit, not continuing to accept a car first mindset as a city, many senior citizens cannot drive. children can't drive many differently abled people can't drive. and making muni easier and convenient to use is vital to serve those riders. i also want to mention that moving the wheelchair accessible ramp would push wheelchair users away from the rest of waiting passengers, increasing their perceptions of risk while riding. it would also make boarding and egress slower as the m would have to stop

twice. thank you very much. thank you. thank you. no additional speakers. okay. thank you, director. so please. um. thank you for the presentations and thank you for all these public comments. i'd like to ask to clarify just my understanding of the extent of the scope of the work here. are you upgrading the tracks as well. director so no. this project currently would just be focused on the transit reliability and pedestrian safety elements. there's not currently a plan to incorporate track replacement as part of it. okay. thank you. and then also, did you check with other agencies like our friends and like, for example, puc, if there will be also doing work along this route? great question. yes yes and yes, they are on broad

street and because of that, we will be joining them for kind of an early. we would if this is approved, we would join them to tie our work together. we'd actually be accelerating that section a little bit just to make sure we don't miss that window to join them. so they're doing some utility work on broad that we would incorporate our bulb work into. that's great. i like i mean, i'm really this is great to hear because learning from our recent experiences, you know, we should be really making sure we are proactive into reaching out to other agencies to make sure that if we can, um, if we can allow our schedule to work with their so then it provides minimum disrupt option to our neighborhood and communities will be better for us. so i'm glad that your team is doing that. so lastly, i have one question i exactly where is this church located? and yeah,

um, if i can pull up the presentation again, the church is located on 19th avenue. hold on a second. so it's located on 19th avenue, just east of junipero serra. it's if you see where that sign is that says new stops with boarding islands and wheelchair accessible ramps that sort of call out box. that's exactly the block where the church is located or the facility is located at occupies that entire block, pretty much. oh, that's the salvation army block. yes. okay, great. thank you. thank you. director hensley . thank you to the team for this update in and seeking our feedback. um, during director kina, as you know, more detailed questions and i would defer to her as she she has the deep

corridor knowledge and i am particularly excited about the accessing ability of the accessibility improvements of the boarding islands. um, so to that end, the one thing i will do is sort of give high level direction. i want my, my opinion of it anyway, for your 19th avenue proposal, um, i, i would work with community of course. and thank you to the members of the church who came out today. but i, i would. and i think staff is going this direction already, but i would not, not not recommend doing option three and working with community to try to see if you can come to

some sort of agreement between option one and two. i i concur with the caller that i mean, removal of the boarding island did not doing the key stop would be would be a step back on the whole for this this project. so i would support moving forward with working with community to hopefully come to an agreement between options one and two. thank you chair. thank. you. director hennessy. director kahina. did you want to speak again? yeah, i just had a clarifying question on the 19th avenue proposal. is there a reason why we're removing parking in front of the church to accommodate the bike lane? is that. no, it's mostly to provide the boarding platform. otherwise as people would step off the train into a parking lane. and it's such a wide travel lane too

that it's possible for vehicles to drive between the train and the park cars even though it's not a second travel lane. so if there weren't if this wasn't a bike route, what we would be proposing here is a bulb like connected to the sidewalk, the full length of the train car probably. but because there's a bike lane here, it's an island. so the bikes can pass through as well. and so this would be a these are new stops that we're proposing here. and the old stops, it looks like, were before randolph or i guess is it north? north of randolph. is that right? that's right. so there's currently a stop just just south of jserra or just east of jserra. it's like right before 19th avenue turns onto jserra. and that stop, you know, there's a turn lane. there's really nowhere to put a safe boarding island or boarding bulb. so that stop would go away because there's really no way to upgrade it. and then there is another stop down at 19th avenue where it intersects with randolph that stop would also be

consolidated and into this new stop at sargeant, which is in front of the salvation army. and, you know, even if we were to keep the stop at 19th and randolph it that would not serve people kind of farther to the north. and we've heard specific feedback from folks who go to the senior center which is which is closer to this new stop location that it's really important to have a stop as close as possible to that facility and especially an accessible stop. okay. and so i asked this not to say you have it. i'm sure you have, but i would really want staff to consider or the team to consider alternate placement of those stops because it seems like i like i understand at least having like a loading zone there for a lot of the seniors that would access those services or just something there. right. because it seems like this institution is serving folks

that have a wide range of mobility issues and that having some some placement there some way for folks to at least drop off, you know, a parent or someone would would be critical for them. so i just again, i guess going back to my earlier direction, work with the community. but i think in the many of options that you're considering that go, i guess it would be alternative for alternative, a new alternative if you all could explore a different placement of the bus. sorry, of the loading zones or the loading area. sorry um, to try to see if there's a way to accommodate the needs of the folks here. um, again, not saying you haven't done this already, but i think we should try to figure out a way to balance the needs there a little bit more. well, and just to

clarify, any other location that would serve the senior center and be anywhere near the current stop would have to block an intersection on. there's just no other street frontage that is long enough to place a stop. so i hear that direction. but if that is direction from the board, we would need to know that that's also the direction to consider blocking an intersection. correct? and when i say work with the community, i think it's the senior center included in the mix as well, because it does seem like we have some competing priorities within the community and that needs to get sorted out as well. so it's a tough position to be in as staff to try to bridge those those competing priorities and try to find a solution. but you all are very talented and i know you're up for the challenge . so i would encourage folks to the team to try to bridge these competing priorities and find a mutual agreeable solution

between them. so thank you for that. um, we have technically closed public comment, but i know it's been a long day, so. sure, go ahead. you've been here a long time. go ahead. what's up? so i just want to make clear right, the current proposal, i'm not sure. i just want to make clear. okay, so option 1 or 2 deputy city attorney is just not allowing. that's right. sorry. if you have questions for the members of the community, you may ask them. but if the gentleman has already spoken tonight, he does not get another opportunity. okay. just one comment. if maybe it's better to speak to staff, you could go into the hallway and share it with staff or something. the staff could could

hear from you directly. yeah okay. um. okay. i just wanted to share one piece of feedback you had asked us for a decision on these three potential options. whenever we're faced with these decisions, i just want to inform any decision making with values. so whichever to me is the safest for pedestrians and transit riders, whichever is the most in lined with our transit first policy and in support of our transit riders and whichever is the most accessible. so those would be some of the values that i would encourage falling back on. to me, splitting up the wheelchair accessible stop from the regular stop seems very bizarre. and i did want to understand what what does this mean in practice? does this mean that the train will stop and then we'll stop again in very, very nearby for any wheelchair requiring passengers? yes and best practice is certainly to have them joined. you have to stop twice no matter what,

because you're always going to stop at even if it's a join boarding island, you're stopping at the general loading area and then you have to the train has to inch up to get to the boarding platform for wheelchair users. but having them all in one place is the most legible. it feels safest because it's been pointed out people don't feel like they're kind of isolated in their own location. but it is something we occasionally do. if splitting stops for technical or other reasons. okay. thank you. that's that's the feedback i wanted to share. any other colleagues have comments on this item? okay it's not a voting item, it's just informational. so we'll go ahead and adjourn the meeting and the next meeting is november 28th for the vision zero subcommittee and december fifth for this last board meeting of the year. thank you all. thank you. .

>> neighborhood in san francisco are also diverse and fascist as the people that inhabitable them we're in north beach about supervisor peskin will give us a tour and introduce is to what think of i i his favorite district 5 e 3 is in the northwest surrounded by the san francisco bay the district is the boosting chinatown oar embarcadero financial district fisherman's wharf exhibit no. north beach telegraph hill and part of union square.

>> all of san francisco districts are remarkable i'm honored and delighted to represent really whereas with an the most intact district got chinatown, north beach fisherman's wharf russian hill and knob hill and the northwest waterfront some of the most wealthier and inning e impoverished people in san francisco obgyn siding it is ethically exists a bunch of tight-knit neighborhoods people know he each other by name a wonderful placed physically and socially to be all of the neighborhoods north beach and chinatown the i try to be out in the community as much as and i think, being a the cafe eating at the neighborhood lunch place people come up and talk to you,

you never have time alone but really it is fun hi, i'm one the owners and is ceo of cafe trespassing in north beach many people refer to cafe trees as a the living room of north beach most of the clients are local and living up the hill come and meet with each other just the way the united states been since 1956 opposed by the grandfather a big people person people had people coming since the day we opened. >> it is of is first place on the west that that exposito 6 years ago but anyone was doing that starbuck's exists and it created a really welcoming pot. it is truly a legacy business but more importantly it really at the take care of their

community my father from it was formally italy a fisherman and that town very rich in culture and music was a big part of it guitars and sank and combart in the evening that tradition they brought this to the cafe so many characters around here everything has incredible stories by famous folks last week the cafe that paul carr tennessee take care from the jefferson starship hung out the cafe are the famous poet lawrence william getty and jack herb man go hung out. >> they work worked at a play with the god fathers and photos he had his typewriter i wish i were here back there it there's a lot of moving parts the meeting spot rich in culture and

artists and musicians epic people would talk with you and you'd >> it is one of the first steps families and step to secure their future and provide a sense of stability for them and their loved ones. your home, it is something that could be passed down to your children and grandchildren. a asset that offers a pathway to build wealth from one generation to the next. and you need to complete estate plan to protect the asisets. your home, small

business, air looms and more. you and so many communities, black, indigenous, latino and asian worked so hard to make yours but estate plans could be costly and conversations complex proud to partner to bring free and low cost estate plans to san franciscans. by providing estate plans we are able to keep the assets whole for our families, prevent displacement, address disparities and home ownership and strengthen the cultural integrity of the city. working with local non profit organizations and neighborhood groups bringing the serveess to you and community, to workshops focused on estate planning and why it's important. >> i'm 86 years old and you do need a trustee. you need a will and put who ever you want in charge of it. >> that's why i wanted to be here today. that is

why one of the first steps i took when become assessor recorder is make sure we have a partnership to get foundational funding to provide these resources to community. but even more important is our connection to you and your homes and making sure we know how to help you and how to protect them. >> if you don't have a living trust you have to go through probate and that cost money and depending on the cost of the home is associated the cost you have to pay. that could be $40 thousand for a home at that level. i don't know about you, but i don't $40 thousand to give up. >> (indiscernible) important workshop to the community so we can stop the loss of generational wealth and equity and maintain a (indiscernible) >> why are estate plans important? we were just talking before we started the program, 70 percent of black americans do not scr a will in place. >> as mentioning being

in community we had a conversation with a woman who paid $2700, $2700 just for revocable trust. what we are talking about today are free or low cost estate plans that are value between 3,000 to $3500. free or low cost meaning free, or $400 if you make above $104 thousand a year, and capped larger then that amount. because we want to focus on black and brown households, because that's whether the need is, not only in san francisco, not only the bay area but the region as well. and, >> i was excitesed to see the turn out from the western addition and bayview and want to make sure we cover all the different steps from buying a home to making sure homes stay within the family. >> work with staff attorneys to receive these free and low cost complete estate plans that include a living trust, will, financial power of

attorney, and health directive. >> that's why it is so important to make these resources and this information accessible. so we can make sure we are serving you and your families and your generations and your dreams. >> we insure the financial stability of san francisco, not just for government, but for our communities. >> on behalf of the office of assessor recorder, i'm thankful for all the support and legal assistance they have given that makes the estate planning program a realty for you in san francisco and are thank all the community partners like san francisco housing development corporation, booker t washington center and neighborhood leaders and organizations that help families and individuals realize their dreams of building wealth in san francisco from one generation to the next. to learn more about this program e-mail inquiries at har

>> morning everybody. welcome to september 28 meeting of the san francisco transportation authority board. i want to thank michael baultzar from sfgovtv for your help today and our clerk is elijah saunders. mr. clerk, please call the roll. >> commissioner chan, present. commissioner dorsey, absent. commissioner engardio, present. chair mandelman, present. vice chair melgar, present. commissioner peskin, present. commissioner preston, present. commissioner ronan, present. commissioner