have rent cars that are being replaced. and that will be going on for the next few years. our actual spare ratio is very minimal in terms of our rail cart fleet. there's not the ability to add additional rail cars to the system at this juncture. >> and i suppose if this goes well we might have some request with the folks on the l line. >> yeah. and it will be a good opportunity where it gets bogged down and such a popular service, maybe we can get that run time down by maybe some changes on the street that it's traveling. please don't be shy about coming to us and asking for support on transit lane changes or something of that nature. >> this is the beauty of a pilot because we want to closely monitor. normally the number of riders

but where people are getting on and off very closely trapped, running type. questions about why don't you stop at karl and cole. we looked at that. and certainly a useful suggestion we want to try it out here first from a ridership perspective and also from a congestion making it really an express bus and avoid getting bogged down in some of that. so we'll see -- that's the advantage of calling it a pilot and it didn't take the better part of 24 hours before i received a phone call asking about the l line. >> it wasn't me. it wasn't me. >> that's one of the lines that can have a lot of -- >> switch back. >> how will that be handled especially with the switchback? what's that going to do with the switchback?

>> hmm. we'll have to watch all of that. i think -- i think that's the challenge we have, a highly subscribed transit system here. and you know, we have -- in some cases with those switchbacks we have just as much traffic inbound as outbound. those realtime decisions have been made and we're making adjustments and we are minimizing the amount of switchbacks but they are necessary from time to time to keep the system evenly balanced -- capacity. >> the director's comments are well taken that this is not for folks in the sunset system. the idea is to alleviate the system so that people in coal valley can get on. >> one of the things that we've heard has been suggested to you already and a lot of it has been forwarded to you this

morning. it was suggested that we look that rather than doing this for the m line look at scheduling switchbacks so that you're serving more of the inner line to actually, you know, rather than do them as a service management technique as we do right now and we had talked to the board of supervisors at their request on schedule switchbacks like the j line as well. it is from a servicing managing perspective, it's a very reasonable and rational suggestion. there are policy concerns that we would have to work through. so that's something thales you will hear because one of the criticisms that we get with switchbacks it's not -- it's both the ushers switching back but also the public notification, the announcements an how quick people now. that remains operationally our biggest challenge to do that right. >> so one other thing i think

of looking at this noting that 70% of the route is on third street on the n judah. that's a lot of opportunity for pairing down the runtime of the actual streetcar as well. and i know that the t.e.t. is the one who likes at that. >> getting rid of a few stop signs they we look at and as we discussed at the last tag or the last board meeting a lot of our unavoidable collision comes at those type of intersection where is the car doesn't realize the streetcar is going or doesn't want to wait for the streetcar. we still have a lot of opportunity. i don't want people to think we're abandoning the streetcar riders. i think we need to continue to look at reducing the run time as well, make it a faster route. >> thank you, mr. hanley. >> thank you.

>> continuing on with my report, the better market street project. the city's bert market street project is being led by the department of public works and the planning department, the san francisco transportation authority and the mayor's office of workforce development. this under taking is focused on creating a more beautiful market street that will provide enhanced mobility for bicyclist, pedestrians and public transit riders. we will get feedback on how to improve market street with urban designers with bike and urban experts. with designs, a first round of public meetings will be held tuesday, may 17, from 6:00 to

8:30 p.m. and to accommodate lunch time webinars are thursday, may 19 and from may 25 from 1:00 to 5:00. the next item on my report is the essential subway risk assessment. the federal transit administration recently confirmed that the workshop will be held on may 25 and 26th at the public office. this is a full grant agreement. and the participants will include from the f.g.a. the san francisco transit authority, and our central subway and project management oversight personnel. this will provide a comprehensive status review of

the schedule and cost risks that have been identified and proper mitigation strategies. we're confident that the project is in track to receive its full fund grant which means the start-up construction will begin in 2012. as you're probably aware that following the board's approval of the proposed m.t.a. part fast track grant, it was forwarded to the board of supervisors. they recommended that they recommence negotiations to establish reimbursement rate that are tied to inflation rather than bart fair increases. so what you approved was in your agreement was a -- not to ex-er seed an amount that are tied to the rate of inflation and ridership increases that do

not exceed 5% annually or a mutually agreed upon amount. so you did have a cap, however the budget analysts feels there's more work that can be done in terms of negotiations. on may 5th, they tabled that item and asked that m.t.a. staff meet back with the bart staff to try and renegotiate the agreement. given that dre direction we have had talks with the bart staff and we will bring to you any adjustments that may be made to that agreement. we will be working with bart to try and resolve this issue. mr. chairman, that concludes my executive director's report. >> ok. >> oh, excuse me. i'm sorry. we took some things out of order here. so my report is not concluded. we do have a presentation from mr. hailey regarding the twin

peaks tunnel operation speed. john? >> thank you. good afternoon, again. twin peaks tunnel. the question has been raised about the kind of service and are we run aring it on the proper street in the tunnel. and is this something that we've looked at for a while. i think it's important that we put on the table the pro vile the tunnel is a critical part of our system three lines to traverse the tunnel and the tunnel is two miles long. i wanted to make a point on the tunnel. not the fact that it was dedicated in 1917 and opened in 1918 for purposes of showing that i know that world war i

ended at that time. but something to say that the tunnel was designed as a streetcar operation and there's a little difference between a streetcar and a modern light rail operation. so as i said towards the end of world war i as the city expanded moved westward, the opening of the twin peaks tunnel remain as critical part of our light rail infrastructure. one of the things to note on there -- 18 minutes travel time from west portal to embarcadero. that's the current travel time. some of the character risks of the ton -- characteristics are originally designed for streetcar operation. p.c.c. cars, imentse to use initial.

i'm talking about wooden ties unva -- unbalanced. the curves in there in eureka in the first portion of the tunnel. and the tunnel is not flat. it's a 3% grade. so it's a very interesting operating environment. and what's happened during the years is a critical piece of our infrastructure that was designed and built as a streetcar operation remains designed and bit for streetcar operation and has been adapted as best we can for a modern light rail operation. so the question on the table is, ok. what is the right speed? the speed in the tunnel is 35 miles an hour.

you may remember as the board a few years ago and again a real camping project is simply taking -- it wasn't a rail replacement project. it was transposing sections of rail, putting them back in and have a smoother ride due to the energy conditions that were in there at the type. does it work, fine? it does. at 35 miles per hour. factors used and if you look at assessing the determination of the speed. the switches the frog, the frog is the connection point on the rail. that remains -- again, the rail was transposed, it was not upgraded or replaced. the alignment means the

profile, the grade and it isn't flat. the weight of the profile and the car itself twice as heavy as a p.c.c. obviously putting more stress on there. the quality of ride and then the travel time benefits. those are the things that you'd want the look at in making an assessment of the speed. but in particular this inner face between the wheels of the rail car and the rail and the impact that that has. some of the discussions, why don't we just raise it to what the speed was before? it's been a while since the speed was anything higher than 40 miles per hour. the traffic substantially won. what we did a few months back is take the train control system and go for a ride. and as we went for a ride, we took the train control system and turned the speed up in five

mile-an-hour increments. i would emphasize, it wasn't a guest. it was a ride from a passenger perspective and the ride proved to be uneven once you go above 45 miles an hour. the other point to consider and i go back to the point i made earlier. the travel time from west portal to embarcadero at 35 miles per hour is 18 minutes. if you raise the speed limit tom 5, 15 miles per hour, you would get nearly a minute reduction in travel time. so that is why -- minimal travel time benefits. that's what we mean. on a base of 18 minutes -- less than a minute. so what are we thinking at this point? where do we stand in terms of the recommendation? this is the appropriate speed

given the chance we're ompting under. -- operating under. we should move forward which were replacing the rail starting with -- some of the rail in the castro curve. you may remember that we lowered the speed to 15 miles per hour. in february we're scheduled to be working in that rail in the next 30 to 45 days. >> we're looking to replace the system. and we will continue to look of how to continue to do the kinds of things we talked about with our other activities focusing on techniques and looking at stop signs and street configurations. but at this point our recommendation is that the -- it would be the right thick to

do to main tange -- thing to do to maintain the car speed at twin peaks. >> thank you, mr. hailey for that presentation. as you know this is the issue to this -- had my interest for a long final. and it's nice to have a complete explanation as to why the speed is what it is. i think riders are still sort of disappointed that the train doesn't go as fast as it used to. i think maybe it's psychological perception. you kind of wonder, why aren't we going faster and didn't we go faster? as the director and i are raising this issue. i'll do my best to channel him. we're pushing for an answer on the speed in the main tunnel. you all lowered the speed in

the eureka curve. let me just get right to the can chase. when the anticipated rail work the you recka group is come plented will that enable you to vert to the speed presumely 35 miles per hour. >> that's already been done. >> ok. >> for those folks who are interested to right that line every day like i do -- what would we do for all the reasons i said is take a look and have something -- you know, the speed -- the factors that we talked about in this particular case. we'd want to look at -- it deposit pends on how we do it. it will be our intentions to raise speeds looking at the real will interface. the curvature, the location.

>> you wanted to review it. so there's two aspects. more recently we've changed the sneed the eureka curve. asouping that others have their safety, when kind the rideers expect in the eureka code to return to 30, 35 miles per hour. this is -- low pressure be done within house. that is open bound and outbound from castro station out to eureka. we'd let you get that done in a 60 to 90-day window. after that if you look at what would be the appropriate speed

that can occur. that's a very specific and narrow portion of work. to replace the upgraded rail at the top. >> after this -- i will say i'm surprisingly short. after the longer term project of rail upglade this plain tunnel, would you envision him getting the speed after it works. do you think it will work in the main tunnel? >> actually you're well ahead of me. we have a full replacement. and the kind of work that cassdrow that i'm talking about with the kind of rehabilitation. you know, with more limited

instructions. i think as we put togethering the capital program in which -- which projects move up or down in the rail replacement going forward. i think that will give us an indication of once we get that done what happens. it depends in it. that's under maintenance workforce. >> we're talking about the entire tunnel. it -- maybe you can speak to how complex that would be. my question is this -- when my little boy asked me why the train going so slow. i've got two answers for him. one because mr. hailey's working on the rail. when he's done that that, and do i say it's always going go

this speed, son, get used to it. or mr. rohan will depend. >> but i like that. >> carter rohan. i think the answers to that is it will the be a long time before we can -- in that area. for a number of reasons. it's not just the maintenance of the intrastrkclur. -- infra structure. if you're a rider an you feel the car demroting, that's because our trucks are outdated. their so old that they need be renovated. >> i the easy answer.

>> i exeesht mr. rohan the right effort. i'm happy to leave it at that. fens thanks to both of them for their report. but i would like a report back on the eureka curve. even if it's psychological and they just don't understand why thavel before -- they talked about the other before. >> i know it's not as money as going fast through the tunnel but it has helped commuters times when we can envacation day with our service rail. they have dropped off passengers and not getting hung up with red lights and things like that. so that's the part that i

always find fascinating. >> great opportunity. great opportunity. >> thank you, john. >> now that concludes that report. >> you do have a member of the public, david sultell. he's the only one that wants to speak on this item. >> david patell. i did meet with him yesterday to discuss this. i see some concerns about this proposal. first it's this black of operates as we heard with the overtime reporter just now. we are down in terms of operators and putting this service out there if it's supposed to be prioritized. will be an increase in use.

the $1.8 million is not in the budget. i question what sort of funds this is coming from. and if this also is a trade-off against other things that are not in the budget. the way this bus system is designed there is a limited market and it's therefore limited benefit and i question what the goal is here success. and i heard the question, gefting a monthly report. but i wonder what would be provided if one will be pro invited. this long line on the end from cal tran to the beach at slightly lower levels like every 10 minutes and layering off a short line from embarcadero to 19th avenue. but that it is not going to 19.

that could be done in my calculation with the same amount of equipment and operators. she would increase capacity in that core so that people that they will look at this. thank. -- thanks. >> is there any other member who wishes to address the pa nel? >> one of the recommendations for increased service in the tunnel is to consolidate surface lines. i think this is a traditional

m.t.a. copout because the consolidation of traffic stops on the service has not resulted in an increase speed of service. this has been done over the last 25 years with no beneficial reports. now, you've got to think of something better. and i have a solution. that means more cars, more drivers. tham will -- that will increase the speed. it's a simple as that. there's one positive aspect. everyone will be home. thank you. >> hi, john hrks aans, stran yellow cab. whatever you're doing on market

street, it's very helpful. the traffic is in my opinion noticeably more flow by so making the -- flowy so making the private vehicles turn right. whatever plans you have further tore make market street developing, i hope it just continues to improve foot traffic, pedestrian traffic, bicycle, public transportation. thank you. >> seeing no one else, directors, we'll move on to your agenda. item 8. mr. murphy is not here today. item 9 it's not on today's calendar. you have several members of the public who wish to thards matter including christopher full kerson.

and peter webb. >> thank you, directors. i want to thank you for your roll today. i have noticed that you voted in favor of identically what i proposed at the beginning of the town hall meeting. there was five meetings of a round-up that we were on the same page if you were both in favor of a meter increase. that would be something that i don't ask for. i'd liking to say that your -- if i were to be wrong that they're ever relevant or make sense, do i not believe that i'm wrong. i'd like to appeal to you especially to director ford to

reconsider developing the o.t.a. that's the open task. ray side from the good will, you'll be ability to ghons strait by receiving 4% of the money. the o.t.a. will receive many problems that have never been solved by releasing more medallions. open taxi accent will encourage the people. it will reduce the log jam at conventional dispatch. several things fall into place very nicely and that's should be the very next item of business, not more cast. basically you're finding a political solution to a business problem. another business solution,