time the vehicle was in use. you could see it's fairly mixed. there were some that were very heavily used. there were some that were much less used. there were some that started strong and dropped off. that picked up later on. the highest utilization were greenwich, valencia 17th, clay fillmore, [speaker not understood], fourth and clement. so, even in some of those spaces there were some issues, which i'll touch upon some challenges which, again, the purpose of the pilot to identify what some of those would be. the other measure we looked at -- oh, i should mention when you're looking at this chart, you'll see a bar going across. and that was basically a control group of off-street spaces that also i think somewhat comports with industry averages or where we'd want to be. you could see some of them hit that bar right off the bat. some of them were approaching it. some were quite a bit away.

similarly on this chart, this is looking at unique users, another measure that the industry looks at. generally we found that there was where you had high utilization, you had a number of high users. the purpose of this is to see how broadly based these spaces are being used and whether it's just one or two people using it. >> excuse me for a second. could you once again, can you just define how unique users are identified? what's a unique user or who is a unique user? >> so, it's -- looking at the number of people in every given month relative to the total number of trips. so, if there was a space near me and i was using it 50% of the time, then there would be not so many unique users. so, it's a measure of how many different people are accessing that individual vehicle to just two or three people who are using it, or is it wide number

or broad number of people. that's what this is measuring. >> [inaudible]. >> sure. so, [speaker not understood]. i think generally what we're pretty happy with the fact i think the general proof of concept, although it has been operating in other places, i think we found that it is certainly feasible. it can quickly become well utilized. as i said, some of them were well utilized from the jump when they went high-demand areas. we did have some issues of enforcement of the spaces, particularly the one in the mission and valencia on 1th. we had a lot of people illegally parking there. we did make some changes to try to reduce that. but it's something -- it's a little bit different issue than we have with off-street spaces. so, that's something we need to work upon. there are mitigations such as signage and other things we can do to try to minimize illegal

parking of these spaces. * commercial areas are good in terms of visibility and accessability, but also can cause some enforcement challenges. and also going through the process of siting. the spaces, as you know, any discussion of taking the parking space for anything other than general use can be contested. there were some bumps in trying to get some of these, these spots cited. so, we need that process and we need to be able to build the support and demonstrate this one vehicle is taking others off the road, i think it will help that process. and then the last point is i think that for those that didn't do as well, it may be partly attributable at least to inadequate outreach and the fact that people didn't know that the space was there and the vehicle was there, maybe didn't know much about car

sharing even more generally. i think the places where it did well was often places where there was already strong demand and the vehicle was just filling a gap or filling unmet demand. when going into new places that may not have that kind of latent demand already there, i think there is work to be done by the car share company or by the city, by nonprofit partners to improve -- to get people to understand what car share is and to get to more of a critical mass of car sharing use. so, i think that's an important lesson that we learned. >> so, were there -- was there multiple level approach to sharing this awareness, the car sharing of the pilot program? [speaker not understood] in english? >> i don't know the answer to that. i know someone here can speak to how the outreach was done or the pilot. >> [speaker not understood] with the mta. we worked with offices and city

administrator offices city car share to select the spaces, city car share can speak to the specific events that they marketed the various [speaker not understood] for that. >> i'm sorry, you work with mta? >> yes. >> and you said you worked with which company? >> city car share and the city administrator's office. -- to select the spaces. >> okay. >> and your office as well. >> right. thank you for that. so, it was all done in english, is what you're telling me? >> i'm sorry? >> it was all done in english? >> no, i can't speak to that one way or the other. >> that's my question. if someone can speak to that. >> [speaker not understood] for city car share. >> [speaker not understood]. >> sure. we actually did over 12 different outreaches in the various neighborhoods, particularly in the neighborhoods that had no existing car sharing before. to answer your specific question, we did do an outreach piece in spanish. we did not do one in chinese. we planned to, we wanted to, but did not get one out. we worked with the mayor's mayor's office to get one out.

particularly in the mission district we targeted various avenues and developments and that sort of thing. >> okay. thank you. i'm surprised in a city certainly the mayor's office knows how to get things translated. i know the mayor [speaker not understood]. i know there are folks on staff who know how to do that. >> i think that helps support the point, which was one of the lessons learned, that there was much better job that could have been done with regard to outreach. so, i think language is probably one dimension of that. i'm sure there are others as well. but that's i think an important take-home from this. >> supervisor wiener has a question, i believe. >> this is with regard to a few different questions with regard to areas you covered. the first has to do with -- it was real a good chart in of the differentxv of car sharing. i know you're aware of the challenges that some of the

more innovative car sharing peer-to-peer kind of services are having with the california puc. and i'm hoping that can be worked there and the cpuc will be cooperative on the task forward. i would just like to be assured that the mta is supportive of having all sorts of different kinds of car sharing approaches and that the mta will -- i mean, you have to enforce the laws. but in terms of making sure that we can have different kinds of approaches to car sharing and not just have sort of a reactive. this doesn't fit into current models we have there for, we have to shut it down. >> okay. so, i want to make sure what kind of parceling out some of these different kinds of vehicle services. so, there are peer-to-peer car sharing where people maybe have

a car in their garage and through some website somebody else can access that vehicle when it's free and they come over and they hand off the key and they drive off. so, it's kind of like an informal version of the traditional model. when you're done, you return it back to that spot and they use different website platforms or maybe apps to make those connections. those are really kind of outside of our regulatory sphere. i don't think, and i don't believe that the cpuc has -- i think it's outside of theirs as well. there are one-way car sharing models that there's one here that is using off-street spaces. i think the city has been, you know, is aware of and i think happy to see the increase in the [speaker not understood] infrastructure that they're bringing to the stable. -- table. there is another model i'm sure

they're going to speak to today that is perhaps more of an on street version of that. what i was going to get to in a slide or two is that we look forward to figuring out how we can see if we can make some of those work. it seems that there may be places where some of these are not consistent with our parking policy and we just want to make sure that we can resolve areas where there are inconsistencies where we don't have different types of rules for different people at least without policy justification for doing that. again, i don't think the cpuc has any jurisdiction there or any concern. what we're really eager to see is some data to confirm that the benefits or pilot to test the benefits that we see in the traditional models would hold and the one-way model. then there's the other realm of maybe what you're talking about more akin to taxi services.

and that is where the cpuc has issued cease and desist orders on a number of companies that are acting not really as car sharing, but more as taxi. that's really outside of the realm of what we're talking about here with the different type. there are cpuc [speaker not understood] vehicles and there are some that are not, having private people. and those are i think within their regulatory realm. i'd say we have -- i have different perspectives on each of those different types. what i do get is that they're filling a void that is created by our current taxi industry. our primary focus is not going to be fighting anybody who is coming in to fill that void. our primary focus is going to be to improve taxi service in san francisco, to obviate the need for those services or at least compete with them. the types of services that are

using licensed vehicles and drivers, while they are operating much like taxis, but with a much less burdensome regulatory framework, while i don't think that's really sustainable in the long term, they are operating with some regulatory framework. with the other ones that don't have any regulations to address public safety or equity of access, geographically a-d-a, all the things we have in our transportation code that we place on the taxi system for a reason, including the environmental benefits of our having the greenest fleet in the country, those are a little bit -- are unknown. we have no data, no visibility into them. they are operating completely absent any regulatory framework. so, there's where we're really trying to get more information on. all of that is outside of what

we're talking about here in terms of car sharing. >> actually, i think that there's a spectrum and some things there might be gray areas about what is taxi service, what's sort of like taxi service, what sort of then leads into car sharing. so, i think it is actually a spectrum. i'm just trying to make sure when we're reviewing how people get around in the city, the challenges around public transportation and a traditional taxicab and we're not looking at it -- this bucket or that bucket. if it doesn't fall into one of our currently existing classifications, that means it must be something wrong with it. i'm not saying you have this attitude. i just want to make sure that the agency doesn't develop this attitude. we need to be encouraging innovation in this area. and i've also noticed that an unfortunate dynamic -- this isn't true of all taxi drivers in san francisco, but some who view any other transit options

-- and i won't name specific companies -- that's competition, so we have to kill it and then resist adding any new taxicabs, provide adequate service. so, that's really my larger point that we embrace these new kinds of innovative approaches to transit [inaudible]. >> absolutely. and to the extent that the innovations are advancing the city's policy goals and doing a way that's safe, we absolutely want to embrace them. there may be some innovations that don't meet those criteria that we may want to try to steer in a different direction or bring them into a framework that is safe in meeting the other policy goals. there's a lot happening out there, both in the car-sharing realm and in the taxi-like service realm and we're not doing a knee jerk, not within our current understanding of a frame. therefore, it's no good. >> and then the last thing i

wanted to ask is about the on-streetcar sharing. -- on-street car sharing. there is i robust on street car sharing service throughout the city which is important to car sharing. i think [speaker not understood], you mentioned this in a very polite way, that they're just taking one on-street spot and converting it to a car sharing spot can turn into just a neighborhood brawl. when we had to find one spot in glenn park in my district to use for car sharing, it was very, very challenging. just to find one spot. and we know that to have a truly robust on street car sharing program [speaker not understood]. do you have any political support to get that higher

number of on street [speaker not understood]? >> that's a a good question. i think that the more data that we have where we can demonstrate clearly the benefits and demonstrate the reduction of vehicle, reduction of demand for existing constrained parking out there that car sharing has the potential to bring, that's probably our best argument. you give us this one space in your neighborhood and you're going to have fewer cars on your street. it actually can be a solution to a parking problem. so, kind of flipping the understanding of it's not just taking a car space or parking space away, but it's potentially freeing up parking because people aren't going to need to have their cars in that area. that's where we need to go. but as you know and as i've said, taking away a parking space is always going to be a challenge. so, the better we're able to articulate those benefits and clearly demonstrate this based on this pilot, the better

success i think we'll have. >> thank you. >> so, just a couple more if you want me to kind of finish here. that does segue nicely into the fact that on street is not the only solution. i know supervisor wiener made reference to the legislation that he's offering to try to take advantage of development that could bring more off-street spaces. in addition to the mta's off-street program, is working with car sharing industry for nearly a decade. we have a number of spaces in our garages. we're trying to be supportive, you see some of the different types of car-share models across the spectrum. and are really seeking to increase the capacity we have in our off-street facilities to support car-sharing. so, it's not an either or. it's got to be on street, it's got to be off-street. we see our off-street

facilities as being part of the solution. and where this may work well is some of the areas like 17th and valencia where because of the intensity of commercial use, while it was a high-use car-share space, we had a lot of enforcement problems with it. but we have parking garages, mta parking garages nearby, so, that might be a neighborhood just as an example where more off-street space might get people close enough to where they want to be without having to deal with some of the enforcement challenges. so, looking forward, and this gets a little bit to the question, what we want to do is advance a larger, much larger scale on-street pilot taking lessons learned on outreach, on enforcement, on signage, on placement. opening it up, we did this just with one operator when i opened it up to multiple operators and try to get to more of the city.

and particularly, to really figure out how an areas that don't have the service already where we don't have that critical mass, how we can maybe get to more of a critical mass. and it may require more than just a single island of car-share vehicle out in the neighborhood otherwise that is under served. so, we want to advance this pilot to see where we can make a difference on outreach and to see what we can do to get the utilization and the number of unique users based on the experience we had dealing with parking enforcement challenges. one of the sites we had a bunch of construction work that really limited the utility of it. so, we want to advance the on-street pilot. on off-street, we've been working with the industry for awhile, but we haven't really formalized the processes for obtaining the spaces. so, we want to do that.

* and we want to continue to see how we can continue some of these models, not just for car sharing. we recently partnered with scooter rental, electric skooters and providing them some spaces and charging spaces in our garages to make that kind of vehicle sharing work as well. so, that timeline for all of that work is really working in the next few months to finalize a policy proposal for on-street based on the pilot and to bring that out to the various stakeholders, including the board of supervisors to issue those requirements for on-streetcar sharing starting late winter, early spring * and at that point start the outreach for the on-street spaces and really get it up and running next spring, late

spring, early summer. so, those are kind of our next steps primarily on the on-street, expansion of the on-street. we'll continue to look at these newer models and seek ways to get data from them, to get information about them, to talk to the other cities where they started to explore possibilities of pilots -- piloting them here, to see what can work and to see to the extent we have conflicts such as with existing parking policies, how we might resolve those. >> go ahead. >> i was just going to say that's pretty much what i had. as i mentioned before, knowing the director of environment is here and car sharing organizations are here as well, we're happy to answer questions. >> i have a couple questions. going back to that [speaker not understood] that you have up on the implementation of the timeline -- excuse me -- i was wondering if there are any

specifics that you could also queue us on what is exactly legislative changes could possibly be. it might be too early for you to expand on this particular question. my second question is looking at one-way car sharing in implementation. >> yes. so, on the first question, i don't think we know yet if we would need legislative changes. as we finish the evaluation of the on-street, if there are things we need to tweak from the approvals the mta and the board of supervisors already granted in divisions 1 and 2 of the transportation code, we'll bring those forward. those changes authorize not just a pilot, but authorize a change in law for an ongoing program. so, it may be that we don't need anything else legislatively to happen. but if we do, we would bring that early 2013 if we finalize our revised policies. and then as i mention with regard to the one-way car

sharing, i've met with one of the companies. and like i said, we're eager to get data and information to be able to validate the benefits that they accrue the way they do for both transportation and the environment as do traditional car-share model. they've provided some information in the other cities they're operating in, what permit schemes they're using to address the other issue of how to resolve conflict with existing parking management policies. so, we're eager to learn more about how they might complement the existing car sharing and overall transit first policy and explore ways that we may be able to pilot, pilot them here. we already have one of them that's operating in san francisco and we're talking to the other that's interested in the possible on-street model as well. >> so, now that you've completed the presentation, i wanted to talk a little bit

more, less in generalities and more specifics. which cities are you talking to, when you talk about sharing, collecting data from some of the other programs that are happening across the u.s.? can you give me some specifics, ways you're going to be extrapolating the data? >> well, so, the one-way on street model, as i understand, operational in washington, d.c. and san diego, portland, i think vancouver and a couple of other cities. so, we've begun to get some information, want to talk directly to the folks in those cities to understand what their experience is. there is' also a report that was done from a program in hanover, germany that evaluated things such as -- i think, i haven't seen the report, but impact on emissions and where -- whether this was reducing trips or not. and, so, we're eager to

evaluate what the experience in hanover was as well. * >> and in this evaluation process, when did it begin, you said in 2003 -- in 2013? >> no. so, we've already asked the company for the information and they've sent some is and we've begun our outreach to the other cities. for we're not waiting for this on-street next round of the on-street pilot to launch before we start that evaluation. we're doing that now. >> okay. so, can you give me some indication as to how -- is this a dedicated staff person or several staff persons that are going to be -- going to be studying this data or culling through it, developing different model structures? i'm trying to get a sense as to how deeply committed mta, department of environment is to conducting studying this

particular -- >> so, our motivation is finding ways to get people out of their cars. so, we have that motivation. we don't have teams of people ready to drop onto evaluating a new innovation that somebody is pitching to san francisco. we have started reaching out to the other cities. i can't tell you how many fte or how many hours a week we're going to be spending on t but we're very eager to see any model that's going to help get people out of their cars to work on the streets of san francisco. every innovation that walks through the door isn't necessarily going to achieve that and we want to do some due diligence, especially if we're talking about giving people exclusive or proprietary use of the public right-of-way. we want to do our due diligence to make sure that we can justify doing so. >> one of your other slides, i think it was number 5, sfta car

share policy, i also wanted to find out who else you're collaborating with to find spots, again, specifically if you can talk to district 10. >> to find additional on-street? >> to find -- yes. >> spots? >> yes. >> so, maybe i'll let alex speak to the process. so, for the next pilot we're going to go from 12 to maybe 100. >> okay. >> and we'll be working through the community processes laid out in the timeline slide in terms of whom -- we'll see if alex can be more specific, alex from the mta is managing this pilot for us. >> thank you, alex. >> the question is about how -- what the process of identifying spaces? >> yes. >> okay. this is somewhat preliminary as we're still developing the policy. we'll certainly conduct outreach with you and ultimately present this to the

mta board. but the car-sharing operators know their market street best. they're the ones who best can analyze where exactly areas where [speaker not understood] to be the main driving force that we'll need to work with them to ensure, it's a good push and pull of a geographic distribution of the spaces and expansion to new market street. so, we're working with your offices and input groups. certainly we plan to coordinate that with other mta policy initiatives. the director mentioned this is something we can author in combination with other policies. >> so, oftentimes department heads may feel like they're under attack when we call for a hearing. and i just want to put my cards on the table. i met with each and every one of the department heads that are present today. it is not my intention to penalize. i'm generally interested in

this -- in the subject matter representing southeastern part of san francisco that had trouble getting taxis. * genuinely there have been challenges that we are working through with mta and bus lines. so, as you can see, i'm advocating because i need everyone, all of san francisco to be concerned. although car sharing, the businesses may know their particular market, i believe nobody knows san francisco better than you and i [speaker not understood] every single day. [speaker not understood] we have an intimate knowledge of what's happening. i'm really here to publicly affirm my support. i like rifkin and possibly others in this chamber don't have a car and rely on public transportation, rely on car share. just in multiple different ways of trying to get around to serve people. and what the position has allowed me to be in a unique position is to really be able to experience and be a user of

what -- the user of public transportation and the various car sharing models that are out there. one thing i do want to say to you, alex, is you continue to source out other potential sites that we've got a couple of sites that are here in the city and the southeastern part of the city. two city campus sites, the southeast campus and we have the campus [speaker not understood] both dedicated parking spot. i'm sure we can have a discussion around that. also want to bring your attention puc is a $3 billion wastewater project happening in the southeastern part of the city. pu crushtion is going to be moving a considerable part of the staff in the 3rd street evans corridor area. * the housing authority, i've spoken to henry alvarez, he's on board and committed to providing spaces, one of which is up on [speaker not understood] in the process of the rebuild process [speaker not understood]. which also includes all of the public housing sites [speaker