and that's like 2 or 3 in the morning any way i'd also like to talk about the illegal ride shares and ignoring the cease and desist order surprise surprise. the regulators try to regulate and their regulations just getting ignored. are we going to span stand for that? those cabs should go on strike just like in september 2002. also the i'd like to sort of it brings into question how is the regulation: the town cars i s

6 op getting in they have the same number of seat belts that we do. these town cars are coming from the midwest now they have heard that san francisco is wide open. uber runs a pretty tight ship but they fire people all the time. they are soliciting on the street every day every night. >> thank you. anyone else care to address the board under public comment? >> good afternoon directors again. we talked about the switch back several months ago one of the concerns we have here we have combined the k and t that needs to be divided up so lines serve one neighborhood. we when it says it's going to be a certain place we need to be honest as to where it's going to go. if you don't know by the time yo

get to embarcadero station then there's something really wrong but more fundamentally you have got widely separated stops you have tps great suppression separation yet the thing still runs like a dog. we need to go back to square one again and figure out how to do rapid reliable transit system. i was on the 33 bus last week having a chat with an operator and she said you know what's my incentive if i have a collision it's a career ending event. there's limits when you are competing with cars and so many cars now with the new luxury condos with people driving

their suv's. >> that will concludes the public comment portion of the meeting. most folks have been here for a number of occasions. we can ask our director to respond and come back. especially the suggestion that it happens way more often on the t than the other lines so the members consent to bring something back at a meeting sometime in the near future okay? >> we're encountered this before with the l train and i think with the announcements making sure people know when a switch back is going to occur especially when they are in a sheltered station as opposed to a non sheltered station. so

that would be great. >> thank you very much. next item. >> ladies and gentlemen we're moving on to the consent calendar. for the record directors, we have a request to pull item 10.1 traffic modifications. 10.2 with respect to washington street escape improvements and 10.6 san francisco bicycle plan project and traffic modifications. and that's it for items to be severed. >> the motion on the consent calendar 10.1, 10.2 and 10.6. >> aye. >> 10.1 has to do with approving

various traffic modifications requested by members of the public. >> you moved a little quickly just then with the action that you approved took to approve the balance the consent calendar on 10.1 it occurred to me there's no resolved section here referring to environmental review these are discussion ree approvals and so i think that's a deficiency in the california calendar item. those documents need to be linked and somehow

available and i note some of these relate to a bicycle lane i don't know how that relates to item 10.6 so you know it's difficult to comment on the substance not having the environmental review document available. perhaps we can get that addressed. thanks. >> you want to speak to that? >> good afternoon mr. chair and members of the board. the holloway slash bicycle lane project on the consent calendar was one of the longer term bike projects that was approved as a package back in 2009 so we had previously come up with a plan to kind of address the traffic

aspects by moving the parking from to create -- we put it out in the field as a pilot and as a result the residents did not support that concept they found it confusing and the street was only -- so this one for current proposal keeps the bike lanes but keeps the parking on one side of the street for half the lanes and on the other half still creates the kind of shift type of effect but maintaining the bike lanes. >> is there a motion on this one. >> a motion to approve. >> second. >> aye. for street escape traffichges

improvements associated with the washington street development. finding that the eir is adequate and adopts and incorporates the motion. the first speaker will be e r.n. estine -- [inaudible]. >> good afternoon my name is er nest stine, weiss first of all it should never have come on your agenda. this had to have gone before the ballot and the jumping the gun it's a bit premature don't you think to put it on this agenda? the people are not being served in this city. everybody is

pushing through this thing without regard to the people's wishes come on it's time you all listened. as far as the traffic is concerned, the intersection at washington street is impossible right now. the traffic connected to the bay bridge now it's awful it's not sustainable. i'm directly involved with all the development from long ago with the giants etc. i can't even imagine the traffic that's going to take place with all this development and the giants with the huge development up here 337 is just going to be outrageous you have to consider all these factors before you do this. please pull this from the agenda until the voters have at least had a chance

thank you. >> anyone else care to address the board on this one? >> yes. >> my comment was not addressed. i believe that needed to be attended to. the resolution essentially the calendar item on page 6 of the backed refers to the planning commission board of s ups and puc have approved their further approvals to come on that with respect to the resolution itself on page 3 the large paragraph in the middle -- i'm not sure that the mta board makes the findings about revisions to the project and the need for additional revisions to the eir i believe under 15162 and 15164 and

section 31.19 c those determinations are made by the environmental review officer and not the decision-making body which you are i'm also not sure if in the next resolve you actually approve the modified project itself or just certain implementation actions and on the final resolved it refers to the parking traffic changes to widen the sidewalks but doesn't specify them they are sort of referenced in the first where as but it's not a very tightly written set of causes in my opinion. and although reference is made to the planning commission approvals, i wasn't able to find those particular approvals i was able to get the addendum to the eir i think that there are some wit

to these matters also there's a reference in the calendar item to alternatives that infees feasible the c u.s. todian of records is not named for either the mta or planning department. thank you. >> good afternoon president nolan and members and director and -- would you spell your name again. >> i did want to spopd respond to the objections and i'll start with mr. kopel these findings are absolutely accurate they were reviewed with the land use attorneys.

and i do want to emphasize that the addendum that's referenced in the findings are absolute ly adequate. the file is in the addendum and the final environmental impact report and the findings were done with meticulo u.s. care. and returning to miss weiss's objections this is a project to be clear only for the height of the project nothing else is subject to referendum for

example the dcw hearing officer issued an order so that's already been done this is normal course of business if you will for a construction project public improvements like this take a long time to get. certainly when we do them these will be wonderful public imovagaiyou want to be mindful these are not taxpayer funded they were offered up. i would highly recommend you do this and this is an adequate approval motion. >> okay members of the board? >> okay any further discussion on it? all in favor say aye.

thank you very much. >> aye. >> the bicycle plan project and related actions reapproving david kopel? >> hello again on this item this is a 182 page document it doesn't have the pages numbered so it's -- there's a reference to the c u.s. todian of records commission secret ary i would note that she's no longer with the city. the changes to the findings aren't highlighted anywhere so it's difficult to

compare this document to the previous document. i am requesting at this time the original and the current document and if there's a document that has the tract changes i'm interested in that i think it's difficult for you to take action on this without comparing them and seeing what changes were made to the text with respect to the findings i would note and i think mr. solomon is going to talk further about the transit impact they are significant so these are not you know minor league changes but have some significant impacts on transit that are not mitigated here and in some cases the old findings refer to m u.n. i lines that no longer exist and in some cases they may not exist and. and

although references made to your board resolutions on 9105 and 09106 it's not set forth directly here so the near term improvements are not called out and i think that's a further deficiency and i don't want you to act until those changes to the findings are made obvious. thank you. >> thank you. >> mr. solomon? >> good afternoon mark solomon again. of course you should approve the bike plan. however the significant impacts -- there's a pyramid there of

impacts but a wide range of impacts down to 10, 22 nds they basically add up to your savings it's difficult to tell there's many contingencies on different options but we can not be digging ourselves deeper on the transit system. the transit for sustainability has to be paramount we can't be delaying that. we're going to end up with a really bad transit system. people getting into their cars further slowing the system down. that's your

capital right there and to give it away for any project no matter how good you guys can't stand for that. because if we've seen the population grow over the past 15 years by a hundred thousand we're already seeing transit delays. you know how many more cars are out there and how much more dangerous it is. there is no free lunch here we have to balance this equation. this is ronald, reagan's environmental law. otherwise they do really

bad environmental work and that the costs of that are outsources to hundreds of thousands of people and it's your job to prevent that from happening. >> good afternoon. >> i'm the director for the san francisco bicycle coalition i urge you to readopt the bike plan. in january of this year the california court of appeals found it to be very sound indeed . we urge you to approve this and move longer in creating a safer biking experience in satisfy san francisco.

>> motion to approve? >> is there a second? >> second. >> further discussion? >> all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> this is the last item on the agenda today. the long-range vision for transit and inial policy analysis

>> we have a cupouple of pro jects, the central subway, the van ness brt that are kind of the next things on the somewhat near term horizon for the transit system. ~ but looking at real projections that we have and because of a couple of these efforts underway, i thought it would be a good time to look much longer term at what -- to start the conversation what the long-term transit needs are for the city. so, going to allow for a brief presentation and this is really just meant to be a starting point for discussion and to solicit some kind of initial directional feedback from the board. so, the first slide that's up on the screen is what we have

defined as what the city and county and the bay area has are the priority areas in the bay area san francisco. requirement for the bay area, regions the bay area -- regions implementation of sustainable community strategy, legislation. that plan will be adopted likely by the mtc this july. in that process we have en where we expect and want the growth to happen in san francisco. and the idea region wide is that we much better integrate land use and transportation planning such that we're focusing to where we have or can build transportation infrastructure. so, these are the growth areas we anticipate and this is coming from the planning department to identify these. you can see many of them are either in our existing population centers in terms of the financial district and

south of market, but also the new projects that are developing in hunters point shipyard, treasure island, park merced and mission bay. so, this is where the growth is coming in the next 20 or 30 years. we're going to have anot 100,000 household, another 90,000 jobs come into the city. so, we've had a good time to look forward because as we know, we don't have the muni system and the transportation system at a level that we would like it to be to meet today's demands. and yet we have a whole lot more people and demand on the system coming to san francisco that we wanted to start the process of thinking about. so, what the emergence of these new job and population centers means is that the travel patterns of the city are going to be changing and evolving.

we've always had kind of from the out skirts into the center of the financial district travel pattern. [speaker not understood] in the morning comes out in the afternoons. everybody lived on the outer edges and everybody worked in the city center. it was kind of a simpler, kind of two dimensional arrangement, but that's changing as the city expands, particularly as the growth happens along the eastern part of the city and specifically around park merced, around 19th avenue, around treasure island and around the shipyard. so, we'll see that there's going to be other travel patterns that will be much stronger, create much more demand on the system than exist today. so, the implementation of the t.e.p., it is kind of critical and necessary first step to get -- to maximize, optimize the

efficiency of the existing system with some modifications to the service brand. but largely within the existing system. but as the growth comes to the city, as democrat ogg regardvses and menomic development folks expect, some of these issues are going to become more challenging, notwithstanding the work of the t.e.p. ~ and i think mr. solomon made some reference to this. as more cars come into the city, that's going to challenge the operation of muni, what we're already have the dubious distinction of being one of the slowest transit systems in the country. the t.e.p. is going to help that. as the growth comes, those gains will be challenged. vehicles are currently at capacity. many vehicles are during the rush hours. and as you know, we have some

vulnerability in the way our system's designed and some bottlenecks and hot spots that in the long term we're going to need to address. but the lack of resiliency of our system to address service disruptions is going to become more acute and more pressing need as the demands on the system grow. so, what we're focusing on and kind of the initial kind of thinking about the long-term strategy are the key corridors that are going to move people in the future. this is very high level and intentionally so. it's not even -- it's probably premature to call it a strategy. it's kind of initial thoughts on what a strategy might look like, focusing on the key -- on the core transit corridors. so, when you look at where we would be even after the t.e.p. and you look at some of these main corridors, you'll see that

providers here have the dedicated right-of-way, bart and caltrain in particular, provide a pretty good alternative to driving right now for people coming from the outer edges of the city, 15 or 20 minutes' travel time to get downtown when things are going well at least. if you compare that to our system even optimized, it's considerably more anywhere from 35 to 50 minutes. so, what we're looking at is as more people come to the city, if we're going to choose not just the [speaker not understood] goals you set for the next six years, we're going to need to shift the dial in order to accommodate all of that growth. we're going to need a lot more people on transit in order to do that, we're going to make transit a much more preferable alternative to an automobile. maybe more akin to the kind of

travel times that are currently available on bart and caltrain. so, we're focusing on these kind of core corridors and looking specifically at where some of the pinch points are. these are the struggles that john haley and his staff deal with every day when there is a problem at west portal, when there is a problem at church and duboce at fourth and k, it really cripples a much larger part of the system and you get all of market street into that category. and it's a very unforgiving system. so, small deficiencies can lead to significant problems. the other thing that our current system doesn't do well is connect to some of these emerging job centers.