the specific factor that pertains to traffic is often the area for those coming west trying to reach the hospital. the consequences of re- engineering this is virtually and real. you are going back to an alice in stockton tied situation. this is not transit first. this should go back to the drafting board before you go do it. thank you. >> i hate to break the stereotype but i like wind and sometimes have it on -- i liike >> this is the major thrill for the neighborhoods. the thing about gridlock, it is

absolutely true. i noticed the the study is missing and number of cars. there is no mention whatsoever, they have done a study. there is massive traffic on venice going to the freeway south. basically, you are creating gridlock. i don't know if it will help the merchants. that is how a hunky dory it is for the community. i don't really think it will be fair for them either. >> good afternoon, commissioners? contrary to the previous speakers, i am a 20-year resident. i am very supportive of this proposal.

also, i am wearing three hats here. i am a member of market octavia, to strongly endorse this plan. i'm also a member of the neighborhood association as was the transportation and planning committee. they strongly endorsed this plan. i also have been very active in helping the octavia plan. the market plan, this is one of the proposals theory i want to thank staff very much for looking at this early. and going forward with this. i think we have come up with a good compromise. we have a lot of traffic in my neighborhood. the street is the neighborhood

commercial street. when i think through the whole city, i think of the street. on and on and on, all of these neighborhood commercial streets are two-way traffic streets. hayes valley is the only neighborhood in the city where part of it is commercial district is the freeway. this is a start. we have a lot of problems with traffic in the neighborhood. we have places where pedestrians cannot cross the street. that is also very dangerous for pedestrians and bicyclists. this is where we are very supportive of. >> ralph jacobson is the last speaker that has turned in a card.

>> good afternoon, board members. i said he will e-mail's. there are approximately 2000 cars. also weakened hours, especially saturday and sunday afternoon, where are they going to go? you believe that everything will just simply disappear, ho way, and vanished? the officials expect them to use a targeted portion of the street to be diverted to other roads. solving one problem will not create another. you don't want to take traffic from one neighborhood and put it into another.

[unintelligible] market street is already overcrowded. venice is also very crowded. this year, when the project is implemented, it will reduce the number of traffic lanes available. it has already received a substantial amount of traffic for ninth street. in the auditorium and the civic center, it runs right through your very own backyard. so, again, she says is an equity issue, you know what to take traffic from one neighborhood and put it in another. the end result is they will be doing just that. the proposal for these changes have not offer or include any alternative traffic about how and where the traffic will be currently billing. the street is already [chime]

director nolan: and the other speakers? members of the board? >> i will thank our new manager and congratulate them for a very well done presentation that did not leave me with very many questions other than the ones that are inherent in this project. i remain unconvinced and will vote against this today. this is a project motivated by very admiral neighborhood motivations. and certainly a vibrant and valuable neighborhood. since the central freeway was removed, this is become a largely westbound and parts of the eastbound artery system as well. i remember him asking that question in speaking to him and not getting an answer. there is no answer that is

satisfactory as to where the cars will go. what i am hearing being said, our new manager at the identified some alternate routes, including the van as routes. it is an artery that already experiences significant traffic. it appears to me that the approach here is let's put this in place, see what the effects are, fine tune it as we go. i very much appreciate the candor in that. that is what has been going on. i appreciate the neighborhoods they're in favor of it. what i'm concerned about, there hasn't been out reach or perhaps there hasn't been a reaction from the people beyond the specific neighborhood that will be affected by it.

by fortune, we have a few taxi drivers here today that can speak to it. they are professional drivers that no traffic flow. i don't even know if we could hear from the affected drivers until we put this in place. there isn't a real solution to where the cars will go. i remain unconvinced. i think the project is better that was the first time around. i think it has done candid responses. in that situation, we have a major east-west corridor. of course, it was done in large part to benefit that particular neighborhood. we have to look at this as a broad city issue. until we have the satisfactory answer of where the cars will go, i can support this.

>> i will make a motion to approve the. we will see the impact of carefully planned. [unintelligible] and the impact the neighborhood with this rush-hour traffic design. the next item to talk about the climate action plan, as we talked about we can't continue to facilitate the streets to

make them work fror everyeone. -- everyone . there is a fellow in new york that says you can do something about traffic. it was fascinating when it was first close of two automobiles. i saw it, but as time went on, they had to turn left. it is not nearly as bad as it was when the first started. traffic is not like the weather. it we can do something about it and engineer the streets to make an impact. i am in strong support of this. >> i am in support of that. as long as we can make adjustments accordingly, i am in favor of the.

director oka: it has been through most of the projects that have been somewhat controversial. once we put things in place and things start to work out, people adjust to whatever changes there are. i know most of us don't like change at first. unless it directly reverse the effects a major part of our constituents for our city, we have to maintain a safe environment for pedestrians and

for people that use of our streets that don't have cars. we are a transit first city. let's act like we are. i am very much in support. director nolan: let's have a roll call. i think we have a divided house. [roll call vote] we will take about a 10-minute break? thank you very much.

>> the mta has developed a draft 2011 climate action strategy for the transportation system and a fiscal year 20092010 departmental action plan. the deputy director of long- range planning will make the presentation on this major undertaking that requires your feedback before being submitted to the board of supervisors for adoption. i want to thank all of the staff that has worked on this. and our partners with the transportation authority and the city planning department has worked with us on this project.

>> the actual court later of the climate action plan and the community climate action plan. >> that afternoon, commissioners. i am the climate action corridor with the department of the environment. i'm here on behalf of the department of the environment and the director of climate protection services that could not be here today. i am pleased to be here today with some of the folks that i think are going to make san francisco actually meet its greenhouse gas reduction goal. as a climate accord later, i work with all departments to produce annual climate action plans. they look at how we as a city are doing to meet our greenhouse gas production goals. i am also responsible for

coordinating the committee what strategy for meeting our community wide climate goals. the presentation you will see today is the transportation section of that plan. two things i wanted to cover really quickly. at 34% of our internal government operations, and gm is the largest single a matter of greenhouse gas emissions at the department level. that is because of all the diesel that is consumed in the boxes that move san francisco resident commuters and visitors around. is with this land that we understand that if we are looking to seek to get people out of their cars, we reduce emissions from individual autos and we will have to most likely expand the fuel usage internally. we expect that the carbon

footprint may grow, but i'm excited to say that we may have some key actions to help produce a of the community wide carbon footprint and our internal carbon footprint. we will be going over them in detail later. the other thing that i want to say is that meeting our climate goals is going to be very difficult. lives of the most progressive greenhouse gas reduction goals of any city in the united states. it will require a big commitment of will, financial support, coronation across city departments internally for the families. and also communications. and really good planning. i am really pleased to have been working with timothy, peter, marty, and our partners.

they spent the last 12 months researching, they have done dozens of phone calls and looked at all plans from across the globe. have consulted experts and partners. i am really pleased to be here to support their work today because i think they have already demonstrated the commitment of both well and intelligence that i think we're going to need to see these things happen. >> i will actually walk through the strategy myself. in response, we had a couple of key areas. wanting to develop the climate action plan that the agency produces. there are three other elements

that really speak to the transportation system as a whole. and there is more about the transportation system and the transportation from congestion. while we have been doing this, we realize there are a lot of other relationships. during the research over the last 12 months, looking at every potential thing we can look out for san francisco, we found that there is not one strategy that will solve it. we will get to where we need to get to. i think the agency we are recommending in the transportation partners really need to work on, and the public. we really felt that this climate action strategy was the cornerstone of a lot of policy discussions over the next couple

of years when it relates to strategic plans, capital plans that are coming before you. and the san francisco transportation plan that looks at, with the money that we have, [unintelligible] there is a community strategy coming out in 2013 between the regional transportation planning agencies and the housing agencies. this is a turn the of what we will expect to see. there is the brief said battle that we have before you, the department of climate action plan. this is really what the agency's carbon footprint is. we are really proud to say that we are on track to meeting the goals for the agency. we are 21% below our goals right

now. mgm has already been recognized as a national leader. we're really working on those legacy systems. this sort of a lead certification standard where they give you gold, silver, or platinum entry-level. we qualify for gold certification. we are one of only a few handfuls of agencies in the country. we will continue to strive for platinum. really quickly, the department will task, emissions were about 67,000 metric tons. i will give you some quick context. that is the equivalent of a carbon hot dark side emission.

it takes that much to travel. while it sounds like it is a lot, we are about 18% of the trips in the city. and we are roughly 1/3 of the mutual footprints. we have been working very closely with our biology's old program. we finally see the effects of those changes. at the end of the day, the mta's facilities represent -- even if we went carbon neutral, there is still not enough to end the problem. one-third is automobiles. one-third of it is the

transportation system as a whole. we are on track to meet the zero emissions fleet. we of completed the green roof on the headquarters. internally, it will reduce our carbon imprint even lower. looking at replacing the vehicles, it will be state of the art. from our waste and recycling, we have one of the largest waste footprints in the city's municipal system. and now implementing the recycling program, it is a very tangible savings. it is green is also green. one of the opportunities we have as well as looking at an fda pilot.

to help develop environmental systems for the agency. they have actually improved productivity while improving resources as well. that is something that we will be looking at as a potential opportunity. i really want to underscore the amount of work that has been done. we have really looked at what we can visibly do it in the immediate term in the midterm to help reduce the transportation carbon footprint. we looked at the existing programs and looked at what is out there that is applicable to san francisco. we really think that these reports raise the bar of reporting for carbon footprint analysis. greenhouse gas emissions are very different from the.

the transportation system is about 2 million metric tons a year. the board of supervisors adopted goals, we have to be close to a reduction to be on track with the 2015 goals that have the international goals for carbon a footprint and climate change analysis. what we found with greenhouse gas emissions, it is really complex and very difficult. sometimes the margin of error is relieved reduction goal. we double check all of our data. legal check the transportation authority's regional model. we found that we recalculated the existing base line. there is still a significant amount of greenhouse gases we have to reduce to get there. our key findings, drivers the

regularly drive automobiles, not those that regularly walk or use bicycle, the of three times as much as people that don't drive. that is an incredible factor. basically, when you're driving, your disproportionately consume trading -- continuing to the climate change footprint. we have to look at how we will grow the alternative. so that people have something to move into or move away from. really quickly, we look at the energy costs which are basically the total cost including the infrastructure and the ground, the actual energy to move something, and the occupancy. bicycling is the most energy efficient mode of transport that we have. very closely behind that is walking.

the san francisco, rail and bus is equivalent. in other areas, it is not so drastically different. we're doing all of the right things in san francisco and it is important that we keep focusing on the energy perspective. this is familiar to this group. the one thing we have been looking at, we probably need to come back to the board and adopt the bowls. that would be helpful for us to move forward with the planning. we feel we are better suited when we're doing that of day. i am going to walk through the key strategies we are looking at. we work very closely with different people. we had a transportation panel that we match. the different low carbon

transportation and production measures, those key areas, it is fairly unique based on each city. they came through again and again and again. we would turn all of the car's electric tomorrow if we could, but that is not going to happen. what is in our control and what is an hour per view is to manage the demand of the transportation system and support those changes. it will really help us manage the demand for demand and pricing had trended development. and the transit improvements, they completely stray from electric vehicle support. that actually works. the first strategy that we looked at, there are many measures that associated.

what it means is getting the information out to our customers on what are the muds' available. certain companies in the city having developed these projects and programs, the information isn't really coordinated. the best thing we can do as an agency is provide that data and really make it available. i think he will see the best opportunities to do that. these that you are seeing, and basically the methodology is being developed. how much could really developed before it is fully implemented. there is the public cost and the private cost. if these are the costs of the public agencies, [unintelligible]

we specifically looked at the impact of the transit system demand. we will go into detail. these are very important things to look at. overall, we looked at these high potential effectiveness. [unintelligible] the second, this is what we felt. this is helpful for driving given a creates this cycle, creating a demand for transit. that creates revenue that are locall