significant investment for the city. it would be about $100 million to build out the 128 miles. but if you look at the amount of capacity that it will add to our city in terms of moving people around, we are limited. we have a seven square-mile patch of land here, so there is not the ability to move more cars. that $100 million investment, we could go from the 8% that we are at now to 20% of trips. that is over half a million trips a day. we are looking at growth over the next 10 years. we are going to need to add to our existing network. the beauty of what david was saying is this network ads that

capacity very economically with a modest investment. we are trying to add -- if we were trying to add that same capacity with transit, it would be far more expensive. this network is hopefully that next generation that goes beyond bicycling, to design bike weighways for everyone. the city is ready for this. david also spoke about this. we have seen an increase in bike traffic with modest changes to the streets. seven out of tents and systems are riding bicycles. -- out of ten san franciscans are riding bicycles. we just need to make them feel

safe about it and allow them to make that economical choice to travel around. we need to take action on this now. we are 100% behind the goal of 20% of trips by 2020. there are a few places where we think we need action now. we need to fold these goals into the transportation plans that are happening now. we also need to reform our environmental review process and move to a new metric to look at impact, auto trips generated. we think we can do that this year. and we are looking at standards for what a complete bikeway looks like, so that it can be used by everybody. and we are ready with some ambitious shovel-ready projects,

because there will be more federal funds coming. here we have ray lahood who is very much pro-walking and bicycling, and we think there will be more federal funds available to be able to build this out. i think the money will not be the biggest issue. it is building a political will to get this done. that can be done by adopting strong stretch goals now to get us to that 20% mode share. supervisor campos: thank you. anyone else? thank you very much. commissioner avalos? supervisor avalos: just reflecting on the presentation,

it reminds me that there is a lot of work going on in my district along ocean avenue and the balboa park station. there is a new development near avalon day, on the north side of ocean. there is a terrible connection near ocean and felin to navigate around that area. i am not clear if the city, developer, if there are nonprofits involved, if they are developing their plans that will accommodate the great opportunity that we could have to make an easier access route all-around that area for

bicyclist. for example, going east on ocean avenue past felin is difficult terrain on a bicycle. but if you are going to bypass and you want to go to the north part of the city, the route shows going up felin along the ocean. it seems like the way to go, but if we are not going to create a connection from holloway, we are making a dangerous route and then we will want to make a change later on. it just reminds me that we need to be cognizant about how we are doing that development. we need to look at the ways that the city is already tried to make those connections. >> executive director.

i am glad the chairman made that point. supervisor campos: just before we continue, we have been joined by the chair of the transportation committee. >> good morning. welcome, mr. chairman. supervisor avalos: we could be doing work in other areas, public space, housing, dot, but are we looking in the future? >> it would be fair to say, commissioners, there is no project of the nature you are describing that has not been looked at for pedestrian accessibility, compliance with ada, bicycle accessibility. the question you are raising is much more strategic. to reach that 20% goal is a big

lift. it will not be something that we do casually. we are going to have to concentrate. we are not just talking about a bicycle components, where you can park your bicycle. we are talking about the connection between those spots, they likely destination that can be covered by bike. it is important, absent those concerted efforts, it will be hard to reach those goals. we are talking about a surface that is about five times the distance of amsterdam. this hilly terrain can be dealt with, but not without investment. she showed you some pictures of these contraptions that you can go on that will lift you up a hill. we will need to invest in some

of those. we do have options that can and energy -- energize the private sector, such as electric motor bikes, which i love as a concept. it goes along with an ecologically-friendly attitude of helping people help themselves as they help the planet. all of that will be -- will have to be put together in a comprehensive program. that will have to include all of the marketing related stuff and that renee alluded to, rentals, transportation, ways to market bicycles to people who currently use other alternatives. it would not be unthinkable that a portion of the market currently using the company shovels could actually opt --

shuttles could actually opt for a bicycle. they whitney capacity on caltrain to get to where they need to go and park their bikes safely. those issues need to be managed. given the right approach, collaborating with those other jurisdictions, operators, we could make some headway with that. that would be a healthier lifestyle for the people using the bikes, would certainly make our program more effective. we also need to make sure in the process of putting together those many connections, the marketing side, planning side, delivery side, we also make the

case through a new way of measuring performance so that we are going to have a program that will be free of legal challenge on the environmental impact side. given our experience, that is an important consideration. last but not least, all of this is going to take a significant amount of investment. we need to probably go the next step. as you recall, prop k was a quantum leap in the amount of funding the city made available for bicycling. to get to this next that, we may have to take another quantum leap. that money may come from the federal government, but that will be a medium term project. it is very unlikely that we will see a significant jump in the amount of funding for bicycle- related projects until we see a

federal bill. one of the takeaways from this session is we ought to be discussing with this board the prospects for advocacy for additional bicycle money at the federal level as part of the reauthorization of the surface transportation act. that is something that the entire board would have to take up. so that we have the resources available, not just for the duration of the experiment, but for a long period time. that is my sense on that. supervisor campos: thank you. david chiu? >> thank you. i want to bring up a couple of staff members. i did not ask any of them to make formal presentations because i know there is ongoing work and there will certainly be

time in the coming years for formal presentations, but in particular, ed rifkin, who accompanied me on this trip, if you have any thoughts or observations listening to this? >> thank you, good morning. director of public works. i think these are great presentations. we are certainly at a point in san francisco where we need to take things to the next level. to the point that the injunction was lifted, the mayor suggested our goal is to be the no. 1 bicycling city in the u.s. with the timing of the trip that we were lucky enough to take, it was really well timed in conjunction with the bike in junction. a few observations that i

brought back, from my perspective of how we get there -- whether it is 20% by 2020 or another goal. we went there to hear transportation and elected officials talk about bicycling. the presentation we heard were always about transportation more generally. they were not just talking about bicycling. they had a holistic view about mobility. they are not anti-car, they certainly love their bicycles, but they are thinking about mobility more broadly. there was reference to a sustainable transportation plan. i think that is what we need. by selling can be an important and perhaps increasing motor transportation. there was also talk about the many benefits of bicycling. they saw the health benefits from a national and city perspective.

they also talked about the economic benefits, the productivity benefits, educational. and they really took a much more holistic approach that i think would benefit us here. when talking about increased cycling, president chiu said this, it is also about parking, education, they have robust programs for youth. in one city, they have a bicycle training center where they bring kids from schools and a paddle around different obstacles so that kids can be comfortable being on a bicycle. education to reach our youth is extremely important. the third take away, and maybe this is my bias, as the person responsible for much of the infrastructure in the city, what they have done represents a significant investment in infrastructure.

not just the construction of it, but in the maintenance. the separated lanes that you see, they are essentially a separate roadway network. they have their own drainage, traffic signals, it, their own street cleaning. it is like significantly increasing our infrastructure. we have to admit we are not doing a great job maintaining the infrastructure that we already have, so it was a difficult policy choice for the people of the netherlands to make that choice. they have revenues that we do not have. they pay around $8 for a gallon of gasoline there. they have a different fiscal situation, and we need to acknowledge that, but there has been a clear policy choice for investment. i would just leave you with the

thought that in order to get to 20% by 2020, it is not all about money but there is certainly investment, and then maintenance that needs to follow for us to realize that goal. this conversation is excellent. i want to thank the supervisors for advancing this. supervisor campos: commissioner chiu? supervisor chiu: i noticed there were some other officials from the coalition. i wonder if they had anything to add. >> good morning. executive director of planning. supervisors, we think this is a great idea. we have been looking at this at many different ways, and we think the mobility goals that we mentioned, they all come

together. just to echo ed and jose-luis, and there are clear policy decisions that need to be made an order for this to happen. the funding is one issue, as renee issuementioned. we have looked at some analysis and it is somewhere -- what we have right now on market street are they bareboned, basic things. we also have some key issues that are transit impacts. fortunately or not, keep bicycle streets are also key transit

streets. we need to see how we are going to utilize the right of way. there's only so much right of way from storefront to store front. we have a transit first policy that puts transit, bicycling, and walking equally right now. in our experience with the bicycling plan, when we are talking about 8 seats, 14 seats, something has to give on the road. there is specific policy decision that we have to make and what our priority is for the right of way. if we want to see this 20% by 2020, many to make some tough decisions on removing parking and travel lanes, making sure that we augment the system rather than compromising it. i think it is a really important

note to make. all the other pieces that everybody mentioned, we have been looking at them. there are some technical issues that are not unresolvable -- but how you get these continuous connections? for example, on market street, we could take it to 10th street, ninth street, but we could not go further and because of transit. that is why we are looking at the market street redesigned to relook at the transportation design. looking at a continuing facility that takes you all the way to the embarcadero. we love the plan that the bicycle coalition has presented. we support it but the issue is funding and policy issues. how do we get that space from the right of way?

we look forward to dialogue and the next set of considerations, whatever they may be. supervisor chiu: just a couple of quick comments. one of the things that was interesting in my travels was the observation that the right of way in these cities are a lot smaller than what we have designed here in san francisco. a lot of american cities are developed with the car in mind, but the history of european streets are a lot more narrow but they made the decision at some point over the last two decades to devote a portion of that to pedestrians and cyclists. obviously, the budgetary issues are real ones. the $100 million number at one level is challenging, but if you think about that over a multi- year period, that number

represents only 0.3% of our overall city-wide budget. at some levels, it is daunting. in other respects, it is not. a third point i would like to make is our population as a city has remained stagnant in recent years. a lot of that is a function of how we have grown, the challenges of being able to circulate people movement through the city. one thing that was fascinating, when you look at the urban cores of these urban cities, they are able to bring in hundreds and thousands of more people to live and work in an area because they can reduce the density needed with cars. in these cities, cycling is a way of life that compliments the use of cars as an other way of life. it is just another mode by which people think about getting around. from my perspective, it is not about elevating one mode of

transit over the other. it is about making it possible for any of these boats to be utilized at any time. supervisor campos: thank you. supervisor mirkarimi? supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. i just wanted to come and join the conversation quickly to express my support and appreciation for david chiu and others who have brought this forward. coincidentally, while commissioner chiu was abroad in europe, i was in latin america, where gasoline was about the equivalent of $0.40 a gallon. the fact that it was so accessible, that it was so cheap, you could see the stark contrast of the environmental degradation that had really

engulfed nations, regions in the area because of a lack of prioritization and the easy convenience to this particular resource. i think it is exciting that we are at this juncture. that means we can take the next step with of vision that could hopefully materialize into sound policy, with a companion piece that has been supported by the right budget, that enables this kind of observation that many have made to purchase separated in the trip abroad -- have made, who participated in the trip abroad. i have one question for the director. less than two years ago, san

francisco was the first city in the u.s. to have a mandatory commuter benefit. requiring the private sector to compensate those who travel to work. at the time, congress was contemplating those who took their bicycles but that was stopped. maybe if there was an ability to update that, that might instruct us in the added purpose of moving toward the real demand of our streets by bicyclists, a huge volume of those traveling to work by bicycle. >> in the comments i made, i mentioned there reauthorization of the surface transportation act. [unintelligible] and i know that several people in congress have been grappling with this.

prominently [unintelligible] a very strong bicycle activists. when there is a prospect for real action there will be a type that you are talking about. for municipalities to look for cheaper municipal transportation systems. which is what everyone has said today about bicycle investments. this would seem like one of those logical steps that can be taken by the federal or other governments to incentivize the behavior we are looking for. the facility investment in infrastructure is complemented by the encouragement of view so that we get the results we are looking for. that is not a trivial issue.

i go back to some of the things that in said earlier, which i think are very sobering and important to remember. we have the most european of environments here in the u.s., but it is still different from places like amsterdam, paris, or florida -- or florence. we need to come up with a homegrown solution. we can have a very good utilization levels that very much justify the investment that we need to make here. in order to get to that, it has to be a package with mark -- marketing components, education components. it must have the other incentive components to a more balanced

system. so that you do not have 70% of people driving. at the end of the day we need policy decisions that are local about the right of way that we have. that is going to be a debate that happens in the context of the package of policies. not just to get the next 10 feet of roadway, but how it will be used and the bank for the buck. -- bang for the buck. with a long-range transportation plan you can demonstrate to people that the other modes are not being personally affected

but rather getting to an overall system that makes sense, getting to the issue of achieving not just the goals related to the bicycle network, but also assisting ability. we will have to do something about that in the face of continued growth of demographics and jobs in san francisco, which is one of the elements we can use to address that challenge. supervisor chu: -- supervisor mirkarimi: i look forward to that debate. supervisor chu: thank you to the commissioner for his excellent and informative debate all around. as we go forward i would like to talk about involving other partners. i do not think we will be able to get there unless the school board is on board.

i think it we shall also reach out to the city college of sentences go, with over 100,000 students. i think we need to think of ways in which other agencies outside the city can be a part of this objective. with the bat, is there any member of the public that would like to speak on this item? if so, please come forward. seeing none -- oh, please come forward. three minutes. >> my name is peter cannon, i am speaking on my own behalf, not the cac. i am delighted to see and listen to this discussion today. i worked for the city a couple of years ago when there were bike lanes and hardly any funds. things have definitely changed.