what we are seeing through the plan bay area process and through the san francisco transportation planning process is we have a lot more people that are coming into san francisco, the population which 30 years ago was something like 630,000 and today it is 800,000 and 20 years it will be over 900,000 and we are going to have a lot more jobs in san francisco. and you can see from these maps that both the population growth and the job growth are going to be some what concentrated largely in the north east and the south east sections of the city and a little bit in the south west as well. and so, the point being that we are straining to get out say the 114 light rail vehicles we need to provide a service although that is below what we really think we need, to move today in san francisco population we will be challenged all the more so as all of these folks come to san

francisco to be able to move them primarily on transit. unless they have to bring their own cars and make their trips in their car on the roads which is what they said at the outset further degrades the service and putting more service on the street as well as more pollution in the air. and do you have an estimate for the percentage increase in the number of vehicles that we are going to need say for, the 920,000 people that will ultimately live here and actually the number may be higher than that and the range could be 950,000 or more. but you know, we know we have had and we need a bear minimum of 114 lrv and we really should have 125 functional lrvs in the system. and there is a number of trolly coach and motor coach and do we know what percentage of increase that we need and a number of functioning vehicles.

>> right now as john said, our full fleet is 151 vehicles. we project the need for an additional number of vehicles in the next five years to get us up to 175 vehicles and beyond that our fleet plan which i think is going to 2030 or 2040 projects the need and i think that ultimately a need for another 75 vehicles and so it is well up over 200 vehicles, that we would need in order to meet the future demand and we have in our current fleet plan. and the vehicles and the 64 buses and the vehicles for the light rail vehicles and all of those categories two require growth and part of the facilities master planning we have been doing is looking at what we need to do with our facilities, that we will be

able to accommodate that growth of vehicles and the main point that you are making is to accommodate this level of population that we would need to investigate into the vehicles and more maintenance to support them. >> thank you. >> so the sfmta board of directors. and the plan last year when they adopted a 6-year plan that was meant to carry through the system. and the 6 years strategic plan and set a goal in those 6 years to get up to 50 percent of trips taken in san francisco be made from modes other than the private automobile of which muni will be a big part of assuming that extra burden. and so, what we have here and the reason for that goal was the city, the board of supervisors back 40 years ago

established a transit four policy, recognizing that if we want the city to be as great and beautiful and enjoyable to be in, as it has been historically, we need to make sure that the people have alternatives for how they get around it, everybody is driving around in their own car we will have more congestived streets and more polluted skies and we will be spending more of our time in traffic than enjoying our city, which will have its own economic productivity impact. and so, one dynamic is really just trying to implement the transit first policy making it possible for more people to take more trips in modes other than in their own automobile. but then the second dynamic as we... because of the group that is coming we are going to have a lot more trips and so when you every lay those two things, our desire to shift the modes that people used to travel and the fact that there will be more trips, it means that we need a lot more capacity on muni, on our bike network and

on our pedestrian network through shared vehicles such as taxis or car share, if we are going to be able to even keep the number of trips stable as the city grows and we need to shift more to transit and which in turn puts more strain on the transit system. so part of the call for this hearing was to hear from the city economist on kind of this relationship that you positive between transportation system and the economy. and unfortunately because of the way this was schedule the city economist was not able to be here we do have jay loud from the office of economic analyst and the controller's office. here to speak and i am going to walk through some of the slides that i think that underlie what the economist looked at and jay will speak to the numbers.

but, the bottom line is that the transportation system matters to people when they are choosing whether to live in the city whether to live in the city, how where they work relate to where they live. and what modes of travel they are going to use to make certain trips. and how they are going to allocate their household budget between housing and transportation those being two of the bigger aspects of the budget, so the quality of the transportation system matters especially in a dense, urban environment like ours. >> and when we talk about the quality of the transportation system that there are different ways it look at it and different dimensions that people look at in terms of their own cost and how much time it takes to access places. a lot of ways to measure. and i guess the take away is

the strong relationship between the quality of the transportation system and the quality of life in san francisco when the system is good. and to do the things that enjoying san francisco and the con is also true. >> supervisor kim? >> actually, so speaking of kind of the quality of the system, but also looking at the graph of where we see the population and job growth and i know that we are talking about just the funding the existing need and how we are not even there yet and looking at this map and we are looking at south of market and mission bay. >> all the way down to the bay view, the natural question is what are we thinking about in terms of rethinking even the lines to be able to absorb new residents and new employees. because the way that you know,

muni has traditionally worked, east, west, west, east, thinking that you are coming at some point west, headed towards downtown to go to work. of course we have more north south and in terms of thinking of how we improve the quality of the system. yeah that is a great question and it is true, and first i would say that i don't think that we have a choice between do we just fix the existing system or just expand the system to accommodate growing? we really need to do both if we are going to achieve the city's transportation environmental and quality of life goals, in terms of the developmentals there are a few different answers, the big kind of stand alone developments like the mission bay and hunter's point and treasure island. and we are really able to do the land use and the transportation planning and do

it almost from scratch and incorporate from the agreement, the transportation infrainstruct stur that we will need and for those areas, really is part of how they are being developed and the transportation structure that will work closely with the planning development and the economic workforce development and the other city partners former redevelopment to do. that is where we need to fill in the gaps, we are using the three developments that are happening in your district soon. and the lawyers and slot a and pier 70 and doing the assessment of the transportation needs of the three together and doing that in a way that contemplates the existing growth in the south of market. including that which is envisioned by the transit city district plans and some of the other plans that have been done to try to take a come plea

henive look at the lines and to increase the frequency lines and what we need and other changes that we might need to make and also we are doing kind of a long range exercise kind of inspired by the work that your agency that the transportation authority is doing to develop the next county wide transportation plan and one of the things that they are asking through that process and where do we need the capacity in the system. and what we are doing, in part to answer that question and even a longer range view of where is the system under strain now and where is the growth happen and what are the travel patterns are changing and it is not just a radio system and not just a east, west, system and therefore, what investments in the transit system, we need to make, and i presented a very, preliminary version of that to my board a couple of weeks ago just to

start the folks of where the big investments will be needed to accommodate that growth. so at a few different levels we are trying to think about that. and sometimes it is hard to do long range planning when you are trying to get 114 drain out the door but it is something that we absolutely have to do. in just one other suggestion is living in soma now i realized that south of market holds a lot of kind of end of the line routes. and actually really interesting and they can be useful once you figure out how to understand the system because it is not as simple as it goes down the street they kind of do a lot of circular routes, but i think that that confusion makes it difficult for the people to ride the rides and i think that it is actually a line that would be more heavily used on fulsom given that there is a higher growth of residents

along those corridors but the lines that are confusing but there are not a lot of people on it and i think that there should be a lot more. so part of question for me is how can we educate these folks on these lines. part of the problem is that it does not come for 27 minutes and that is the whole different set of issues. but then one of the issues why we don't put the people on the lines is that you don't know how to use them >> that makes sense, the simplicity of the lines i also find it confusing. >> so one of them here is saying that the terms that we are doing, that i didn't mention is what is in the transit effectiveness project which is under going environmental review and i think that we will have a draft eir out this summer and one of the things that we are looking at is alignment of routes and we are looking at what the transit planners called the legbility of the existing routes, which i think that you are referring to is have, i

believe, the specific recommendations for the ten and the 12, and a proposal for a new line which tentatively could be eleven. and that would particularly focus on the south of market, area, where we or the transit system has not kept up with the growth of what happened already let alone what the transit center is calling for and the central corridor might call for and the eastern neighborhoods and the western and there is a lot of planning and that is what happened. and so we are trying to at least in it for the near term, trying to use the tep, to try to pull some of those gaps as the long term vision of those plans evolve. >> and that is a great thing that is barely the fastest growth and when we can't look for the long term to make those changes. >> thank you. >> so, the economic impacts of

transportation and i guess ta we have kind of focused in the negative but when the transportation is not good, it impacts the quality of residents, that can impact the labor pool for the businesses which has these kind of costs, and one of the imp itus. we are going to take a brief recess, you can keep talking, he needs to get some water. for about 30 seconds. >> now we are unrecessed. i am going to ask for the controller's office to come up and speak to the numbers because one of the specific requests that came with this call for a hearing was to try to start quantifying what the impact of the muni delays are

to the san francisco economy. thank you and we welcome and thank you for coming in and pitching for ted our economist who did a lot of work but was not able to be here today. go ahead. >> sure. so ted, was the analyst on this, ways not involved. but i will talk a little bit about the numbers and ask the questions to the best of my knowledge, we looked at muni data and we found that there were 86,000 customer hours lost in the peak hour delays due to maintenance and other reasons like break-downs, and we have been in use publicly available data to get commute times and we are able to use that with the muni data to back out that this was, this dead to the delays led to the increased time for the san francisco residents by about 1.5 percent

and we looked at the impact of this, you know, the higher and the delays lead to higher cost or the competitiveness as it was talking about transportation, quality transportation that effects the region's desirability as a place to live and work and so we think that these delays increased labor cost and decreased the home values so we are estimating an economic loss of 4.2 million for the delays in april. and just that one month and annualized that is about $50 million. i should add this these are con sefbive because we are looking at peak hours and specific types of muni delay reasons. we also did not do the extended

analysis on how this might effect the businesss that have customers that need the transportation access. and to go to the stores. and so if we wanted to do a full impact and we would probably need to do a more thorough analysis. >> okay, thank you. and i know that the controller's office is actually going to be getting some new software that will allow for deeper economic analysis? >> right, we used the macro model remi, the regional model for san francisco, and we have recently we went to the add on that is transportation related specifically. now, i just this is an interesting subject i think that a lot of people, when there is, a problem in the system and the delays and people think, this is having a... you know an economic productivity impact and so this is as far as i know the first

time that we have done this analysis and i think that it is a good start. and i agree with you, that it is conservative, which i think that probably makes sense for when you are starting out to take it step by step and just to reiterate this, this is a subset of muni related delays, and it is only peak hours during the week. and it is limited to specific events, break-downs, and very discreet main nens or vehicles of kinds of failures or you know that someone has a medical or an event or something that delays the system, is that right? >> right. >> and also the maintenance reasons. >> so there are, of course, other issues and i will give you two examples from last week. but, i don't think that there is any way related to a break down or a maintenance issue.

there was one day last week when i commuted from castro station and there were, because i checked that there were, and it was not apparently caused by any break-down or maintenance problem, but there was approximately 15-minute gap in service where there was no vehicles and missed runs and some other issues that should have combined, and led to no train service for approximately 15 minutes and then the next day, and we charitablely can call it a bunching and i took a photo of it and if you want to put it on the overhead and there were about ten vehicles in a row. and for me and my constituents

to go to the stop from castro and to vaness and now the two, back-to-back days with the problems and to my knowledge, neither one was caused by a break down or a specific incident it was just wait that the cookies crumbled and the system that day and there really were there was no different had there been a break down and as i understand it, those kind of incidents or happenings would not have been captured in the economic analysis. >> that is correct. >> i know that it is hard tore capture because of the specific log reports of those kinds, of things and just for the benefit of the public and $50 million annual estimate is quite conservative but i think that it is a solid start. >> great. >> thank you very much, i appreciate it. >> mr. riskin? >> so i think that the

conversation to begs the question that what do we take from this, i think that going from the next slide and i think that one of your main points is that reducing the transit delays will create the economic benefit for the city and over the converse of the last slide and what i would add is tra transit performance more generally can create additional benefit and eliminating the delays would have benefits that improving the performance beyond and it would have additional benefits and in other city transportation and structure and the benefits that exceed their cost. and that may be more or less true for the different types of investments and this kind of analysis can help us determine what return on the investment might be from the different kinds of investments, i guess

that along those lines i wanted to look at this from a different perspective. right now, the city as a whole, let's say, conservatively is paying, $50 million for these delays, what i thought might be interesting and ininstructive to think of it differently if we could take that $50 million and invest them in the system and what we would be able to do. and hear some of the examples. and what we might be able to do. and and we took that $50 million, and goes out to the cost of delay and from delay and able and some samples that we could the buses each year and rehab 17 on buses and increase lead towards the numbers and improve the reliability and improve the on time performance.

and it could improve the frequency of the buses and we would eliminate the gaps. and so i think that making the connection between the transportation system and the economy is a good way and an additional way that i suggest that we think about it is how involvements that we could improve the performance of the system that we could improve the quality of life for the people in the city and so that is all that we have for the presentation and we are happy to enter the questions >> thank you very much. >> appreciate it. >> and if there are no additional questions, or comments. we will open it up to public comment. do we have? we have no public comment cards, is there any member of the public that would like to speak? >> okay. seeing none, xom on up. >> public comment will be two minutes. >> >> mr. chair? >> madam.

i am a senior. i'm... there are times when i see stuff happening on the muni transportation. and (inaudible) with seniors is a shocking. i would say that then the drivers need to be trained. so that when they have to deal with the traveling public. and especially seniors, that they will be more respect for them. now, you guys think that seniors cannot get along as they were when they were younger. and i have seen time and time

again that seniors try to get to the bus stop. and the bus... and the driver is so inconsiderate. he won't even take a few extra moments to wait for that senior. so, i have the... (inaudible). i have been longing for the opportunity like this to speak on this matter. and i learned from the opportunity today. you need to retrain a lot of those drivers. and my train point that i have a moment ago, that is seniors are not able to... (inaudible).

>> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> is there any additional public comment? >> seeing none, public comment... yes, come on up. come on up, sir. >> hi, i just have a few points. and number one, just listening to the conversations that muni is almost genetically designed to fail on the basis of equipment or people, it is genetically deficient and number two the only consistentcy is the unreliability which you heard about in the entire hour, the consequence to muni failure is nothing, more meet ands more discussion and more excuses and four to fix it no more parking tickets you will not be able to issue $300 million in parking tickets. >> san francisco is a world

class city and muni is an embarrassment and it is sad to see this kind of qualification and number six the idea of transit first is hollow and not subnative at all. and number seven, it is common sense to wait for something running for a bus to let the passengers know why there is a delay and how long the delay is anticipated. you don't need a larger bus, you just need some common sense and sensitivity to the citizens to the city, thank you. >> is there any additional comment? >> yeah. thank you. >> chair weiner for calling this hearing. and even though we hear a lot about the issues relating to muni it is always really helpful to see the numbers, to kind of pinpoint what some of

the issues that we should focus on budgetarily, and actually the it reminds me of the budget that we saw as well. being that much of the public school funding as well as the public transit funding and that we can expect it to come from and so a lot of it is incredibly important system and so having a city that is also willing to supplement this. and basically that deficit that we get from the state budget, is a really important conversation that we continue to have here and representing the district where most of the growth is happening it is incredibly frustrating to have this conversation around the infrastructure, and that almost makes you not want to support the growth and it looks like the city is not ready for the current population size, but it

is exciting to have these conversations and i have been impressed with how the sftma has been addressing the issues over the last two years and i think that there is important leadership that we as a board in the city have to figure out how we can support the leadership as well. and so i know that supervisor weiner and avalos and yee are involved in the transit work group and the conversations around the vlf and what the biggest bang for the buck is if it is around the capitol and the cost and the maintenance costs in terms of how we can improve the muni and i think that is what is most helpful for me to understand and because clearly we are not going to be able to fund everything that we would like to see ongoing. >> thank you. >> supervisor kim. >> i want to make a few concluding programs. your first, i want to thank the mta and the controller's office for the presentation today. and i think that it is it is

mentioned that it was helpful to boil it down to the numbers. and that is really a key, really the step to knowing what direction you have to move in. and sometimes i hear from people, or we need more money, we just needs to run the system that it has and in fact muni needs to continue with the process of reform and we have seen some changes recently in the last four years which has been positive. and muni needs to continue aggressively about whether it is better, street level, line management and improving the train control system and continuing to reform work rules and just constantly moving in that direction, for sure. and i think that it is not reality to suggest that the system somehow has every penny that it needs and and if it just reform