there is currently -- where the the curb on market street is currently. you can see a dotted red line sort of in the middle of the street that shows the existing boarding island. if you look on the lower right you can see the new boarding island. you can see how much larger it is. you can see where the green cycle track is. and i'll show you -- this arrow shows where our prospective will be in the next slide. i'm sorry, i took out the prospective. we'll see that when neil shows his presentation. so, then, this is mission street first to 2nd street. this is not a typical block for mission street because this is near the transbay terminal. but it does show that we're taking into account in these drawings and all of the studies all of the other district plans that are happening, especially in south of market because there are so many. so, this reflects some of the

widening of sidewalks that would happen. this is unique in this block. most of mission street, there would be no moving of curb, but because that happens in the transbay plan, we've incorporated that into this. and you can see there is a buffer, a cycle track with a buffer in this plan. this is the section for mission street showing the cycle track and the buffer. and two lanes of traffic in each direction. and this is a rendering -- we'll have quite a few renderings at the public works shops trying to illustrate what these will feel like, what the concepts will feel like and this shows a street life hub which is a really robust, an area where there is room for he a robust street life ~ with tables and shear and some sort of kiosk. and i will let andrew lee take

over. >> thank you. mr. lee? >> good morning. andrew lee with the sfmta, i'm the lead transportation planner for better working street project. and i'm going to cover some of the initial findings that we've reached in studying some of the concepts moving forward. as a quick reminder, market street is an incredibly dense multi-modal corridor and we're asking the street to handle a lot of demand. you can see specifically where it peaks around the retail district around fourth and 5th street and there is limited right-of-way amongst all these competing modes. so, the basic question is how we are prioritizing amongst these modes, transit, automobiles, bicycles, taxis, pedestrians. similarly, mission street has the same sort of peaking behavior around the retail heart, however it does actually climb as it goes towards the embarcadaro and financial

district and it's showing a lot of emerging growth that we also have to be accounting for. for the transit operations on both market and mission, we can see that the system is struggling. there is a lot of congestion because all these lines are meeting right along the transit corridor for both market and mission. the speeds are roughly 5-1/2 to 6 miles an hour and we'd really like to see those operational speeds improve. you can see also that there's a significant amount of delay associated with loading at the stations. and, so, some of the basic improvements that we've proposed as part of this project are optimizing some of the stops, spacing them out a bit farther apart the existing stop spacing on the left shows that there are stops for both the curb side and islands at every single block, and for the first proposal it would be spaced out at approximately 1-1/2 to 2 block. and the rapid concept punches that up a notch even further by

spacing out the center islands into more of a brt-like system so it would match the muni metro and bart station spacing. associated with this would be lengthening of all of the bus boarding islands and curb side stops so that right now we have stops as short as 40, 50 to 60 feet which could really only accommodate one 60-foot bus. the improved stations would be much longer that could accommodate three 40-foot buses or two 60-foot buses. they would have the accessible stops and lifts -- not lifted, ramps at all these locations, and they would be much wider, 8 feet wide, up from islands as narrow as five feet wide. ~ lifts we're also noticing in our initial studies is that automobile restrictions and

bicycle facilities work in concert to improve transit operations along market street. having a continuous bicycle facility and having a complete prohibition of automobiles will benefit transit operations. and what we're noticing, that under an absolute scenario, we're pretty confident that the transit operations will meet the project goal of 15% travel time improvement or better. and for the local enhanced concept, that benefit is roughly balanced between island and curb side service at about 15%, whereas the rapid concept would improve the center service by 2 to 3% and the curb side service would run slightly slower. >> excuse me, before we move off that slide, you know, i think we had from the pilots we had on right turns, these have improved to speed up travel time along with what you described with other elements

of findings. that was a pilot that was done a couple years ago with two intersections. are there plans to do other types of pilots? i know there's been a lot of discussion about that to improve that point and understand what impact that's going to have and i want to get a sense of whether that's something that's being discussed and when we might be able to see them. >> we are certainly discussing it right now. in fact, we've revisited those turning restriction pilots and noticed that after a couple years, the compliance rate has dropped, particularly at sixth street -- >> compliance rate has dropped? >> dropped gown to 30% at sixth street due to design without the channelization, where it's roughly 30% compliance rate. we've reached out to sfpd to beef up enforcement at those areas and enforce the bus only lanes and we're looking network wide which i will touch on other slayedx. slides. >> are there plans to do other types of pilots?

>> there are plans to do other analysis at turn restriction at additional locations farther down. >> can you give us a sense whatv those plans are, what the timing is for when we'd be able to see them? there's been a lot of discussion about this over the last couple years and i think there is a bit of frustration that we're not actually seeing the pilot. so, want to get as much detail as you're able to give at this point. ~ >> sure. some of the turn restriction we're looking at is o'farrell and grant and channelizing the right turns and the outbound turn restrictions around geary and sutter street and possibly around battery and bush. those are under study right now. we are taking in all of the data we collected about the existing turn restrictions and also the existing pco level of enforcement needed right now for the market street construction, and trying to figure out how we can put those pilots in without adversely

affecting downstream operations because there is also other issues on mission street that we've recognized as well. so, it's [speaker not understood] i can't give you a direct [speaker not understood]. >> next week might be able to get feedback on that. >> sure. >> and on the issue of compliance going down 30%, what is the time frame -- how long have we known compliance has been low? >> bewe collected that information just over the last month ~ and we've reached out to pd within the last couple weeks. >> okay, it would be great at the next hearing or next check in on this if we can get information from sfpd how their enforcement is going to make sure this pilot makes sense. from my perspective it makes sense these are the direct near term improvement that could help inform the broader project and i'd like to make sure that they are on track. >> sure. >> how did sfpd respond to the request for added enforcement? >> i'm not aware of any response wrest. yet. >> okay. i'll be honest. ~

we've had quite a few bus only lanes in the city and i don't think i've ever seen them be enforced. we put the new red lanes on church street. supposedly they're theoretically being enforced. i've never seen or heard of any enforcement on the red lines on church street. and just so many of these changes potentially rely on enforcement. and i don't see that enforcement happening. you know, mta paid a lot of money to the police department every year, even after the current budget goes into effect. and i just don't see -- i just don't see that happening. i'll say the same with double parking. we have an absolute -- you know, epidemic of double parking everywhere in the city and that screws up muni. it screws up biking. it messes up a lot of thing. and that's sfpd and mta lack of enforcement. he you don't see enforcement

even on major corridors where a delivery truck is double parked and stopping an entire muni line in its tracks. is there a sense that we're going to see those kind of improvements? because some of these short term trials and even the longer term are going to be very reliant on effective enforce many by mta and by sfpd. >> yeah, that's definitely something we're trying to account for for the design. we want to the greatest extent possible have self-enforcing designs like the one at 10th dr because it's a channelized turn and just a much higher compliance right there. but we also want to be sensitive with the automatic enforcing design that is sensitive to some of the land use access issues for accessible, for hotel access, for business deliveries. so, we don't want to be too heavy handed with that. that is something we're trying to follow-up on. >> just to reiterate, i think -- it's currently and will be, a critical missing element in a lot of our street relate and

had transportation related policies, the lack of any single encroachment existing enforcement. >> agreed. >> you can go on. >> so, in coming up with the market street and mission street concepts, want to acknowledge supervisor wiener's question about additional buses from mission street onto market street. the transit improvements i touched on earlier increasing the station and boarding island capacity will provide additional room from buses to operate more effectively and efficiently. but we would be with the mission street alternative be adding about 30 to 35 buses during the peak hour onto market street. so, whether or not the market street improvement bias [speaker not understood] capacity to accommodate mission street buses is still under study and will be determined. however, i want to show that between market street and mission street, we're really looking at two different types

of cycle track. the market street cycle track is vertically separated, has a site lift for bicycles to get on and off the facility, and brings the people and bicycles much closer to the activity of the street. it does require cutting back some of the right-of-way as market street is quite constrained. the advantage for mission street is with the bus-only lane and some of the parking being moved away, that there is adequate right-of-way to put in a horizontally separated cycle track. and without the buses to also implement a greenway. so, we're looking at slightly faster and horizontally separated facility. we think of them as two fundamentally different types of facilities that may appeal to different types of users. and this is why we feel that this is an alternative worth moving forward into further study. paramount to creating a bicycle

facility on a street away from the primary attraction is connectors. and the project team has come up with a project concept to actually provide a direct connection onto mission street from valencia and possibly also from the wiggle. and this figure shows some of these north-south connections that we think could be implemented with a parallel facility approach. i do want to acknowledge, though, that there is a very large existing volume of people on bicycles on market street that are much greater than what they are on mission street. and a lot of that has to do with the existing bicycle facility and how on market street and how they naturally channelize further into the system. but also there is opportunity from our origin and destination studies that there is a lot of bicycle activity growing in the south of market area and also in the mission and castro area. and, so, the anticipated growth

for bicycle trips is shifting south ward. and, so, having a parallel facility may accommodate that growth efficiently. and then there is also a large desire to see a cycle track and some of the preferences that we've collected show that people are willing to divert if necessary to access the cycle track. i'd just like to close with acknowledging that we have a grid system that has many [speaker not understood] effect. so, any changes in the automobile circulation, including forced right turns or turn prohibitions will have downstream effects. like i said, we've reached out to sfpd for enforcing and taking a note of the manpower needed to enforce turn restrictions. a couple weekends ago we had construction and they needed 2 to 3 control officers at each

and every single intersection. and, so, we want to put in improvements that avoid becoming too labor intensive. would rather have solutions that are self-enforcing and we also want to balance access concerns for a lot of businesses throughout the corridor. with that i'll -- >> thank you very much. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is neil [speaker not understood] and i'm with the san francisco planning department. i'll walk you through an overview of the major design principles and then tell you some of the highlights from the plan, from an urban design perspective. first, market street, the market street design will make the icon i can unifying design reflecting the importance of san francisco. but one unique quality of market street is the collection of plazas, on or adjacent to the street. the plazas enhance the character of the street and further identify the unique

districts along it. they are an extension of the street as a public space and they also feed the street life in ways that sidewalks alone can never do. to complement the unified design will be new elements that highlight the changing character of market street as you move from one district to the next. this is a real asset that we have not taken advantage of yet. we have identified sick districts along market street highlighted here. ~ six districts also as the downtown becomes increasingly pedestrian focused with more development, more transit, and more bikes, the network of routes that are appealing in their design to pedestrians is an important new piece for the city to consider. as we develop this network, we should be -- keep in mind that the large number of important pedestrian destinations, and this list is growing.

so that the results provides the most meaningful set of pedestrian routes at the highest quality. also, private development highlighted here in purple should be leveraged where possible to help build out this network. now, we know how design routes and spaces that appeal to pedestrians, but we have not always adhered to these principles. here are three overarching principles developed by architects from our team that we should be following. the heart of the heart. market street between third and fifth is the heart of market street. it is the one location along the entire length of the project, a project which spans a little over two miles, where place, sense of destination, and public life form the most important design criteria. movement, however, dominates everywhere else along the corridor. this is the crossroads where there are almost as many

pedestrians moving to destinations north and south of market along it as shown here on this slide. there is a growing number of pedestrian destinations from cultural institutions to retail centers to moscone center, to the over 20,000 hotel rooms in the downtown. plus the thousand of residents and hundreds of thousands of employees. ~ thousands as we study the pedestrian use along market street and along mission street, we found a dramatic spike in pedestrian volumes during the peak hours of retail on third and fifth streets. interestingly, the two ends of mission street have comparable numbers as market street. they follow very similar patterns. mission street just slightly lower. so, moving to the design, through the design we address the large number of wide intersections, many of which are uncomfortable for pedestrians to cross by narrowing them.

we're also redesigning two of the four intersections with middle islands which currently force pedestrians out of their way and require them to cross two lane cycles which every other mode gets to do. crowding is a factor we consider? n studying minimum widths ~ for comfortable but intimate walking experience. and finally in san francisco we consider the public space, we consider streets as public space and not just as a means to move from a to b, and this will be reflected in how we've laid out market street. now we turn to public space. what this shows, plazases offer very little variety of activities. it results in a mono culture of use. ~ just notice the large number of blue tones similar to activities highlighted here in the number of plazas along it.

volume is lower than peer international cities. some plazas are well used. others are not so well used. and other plazax offer new opportunities for more near term improvements. ~ plazas finally looking at the identity, the undifferentiated sidewalk creates month knot us in environment and ignores characters which goes against the diversity of san francisco. monotonous ~ also the sidewalk design, cluttered space in an open and random way but not responsive to the context or any clear sense of hierarchy. and the new design brings a clear hierarchy to the space and includes more invitations to linger and enjoy the market street vibe. and in light of the -- bringing

strength to the character of the different neighborhoods, there is the element of the dee sane that reflect the different district identities. now, in terms of the design and actually looking for the pedestrian, there will be 15-foot wide path to travel and a 6 to 10 foot wide street life zone. it will be a smoother and more comfortable walking surface. [speaker not understood] pedestrian crossings will produce safety and crossing convenience for pedestrians, while transit boarding islands will be integrated into the public realm in a visually distinctive way. in terms of how this might look, once it gets built, this offers the design that builds upon the multiple modes that use market street to create a more inviting, exciting and comfortable experience that will vary as one moves from one district to the next.

it integrates transit rider as someone who use he benefits from a more pedestrian focus design not just as someone who sits or stands at a bus. maze as, plazas are key elements to creating key vibrant attractiveness in market street. various spaces and activities along this length has something that offers -- has something to offer to a broader cross -section to visitors and residents. [speaker not understood], address shortcomings and offer inspirations for new opportunities. each plaza has been studied to understand what works and what needs improvement. the plaza shown here has the greatest potential to become something truly special. it has the foot traffic to support many more activities on the surface. and despite being the most well used plaza along market street,

it still fares poorly to comparable spaces in peer cities in terms of number of users and activities. clearly the large hole in the center of it is the main reason for the center of performance. now, we presented the urban design aspects of this. there have been other comments in the past about what is going along within the buildings and that is a parallel project led by [speaker not understood] in the planning department and, so, this really taken together has become a very much closely integrated and compatible set of proposals that are developed that go along with land use, urban design, and transportation all as one package. thank you very much. and then finally, public workshops coming up in the middle of july, we've been able to give you a small teaser here of the large amount of work that's been done, and invite everyone in the room to come out and join us and see everything in detail. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> can i ask one question to

mr. [speaker not understood]? neil, i think one of the questions that many of us have around sort of a mission versus market options about essentially separating pedestrian transit from bikes is i think laid out in your presentation about the identity of market street as being sort of a place where you want to build community and you want to have a lot of very difficult verse constituencies going through. and i think the challenge with sort of separating the various transit communities, while i think it could make some sense from a purely kind of engineering and transit standpoint, i worry about the character, worry about the identity of market street. wonder if you could respond to that from a planning standpoint. >> i think in terms of including the track in market street, we've always seen cyclists as contributors to public life. the more that we can do to treat them as something closer to a pedestrian to a hard object like a vehicle, i think the better off the system is. and, so, the cycle track option for market street certainly

goes to great lengths into integrating that into the street life zone. the street life zone is really supposed to be like this space where transit riders transition into pedestrians and back to transit riders, where cyclists can get off, park their bike, go into a shop. cyclists can do it very easily. i think cyclists on market street contribute a lot to the public life and are very much a growing and important constituency in the city of san francisco. >> again, i absolutely agree with i think all the statements you just made and one suggestion to the working group is thinking about how you balance what was just expressed with how we want to build a community on market street versus some of the transit and engineering constraints that we have i think is our challenge right now. >> good. thank you very much. >> thanks. >> thank you.

>> i'll just briefly show where we are with our costs for the planning phase. this just shows our budget and our expenditures. is, for the consultants we have just about 400, $500,000 left. for all other city costs we have [speaker not understood] left. this shows what we have for our environmental phase. we're carrying forward $1 million from this phase for environmental. and for the 13-14, we have about 2.5 million that we've put in the budget for the first year of the environmental phase. >> is this the one slide for budget? >> yeah. >> i had asked some questions earlier about near term pilot projects, particularly around

thinking about how we deal with double park, how do we consider other required right turns, other types of pilots to really think about reducing public auto traffic. is that part of this budget? >> that budget is separate. some of it comes out of mta budget. it comes from different places. it's not part of the better market street budget. so, each one has -- many of them are out of mta's budget. some of them are out of dpw's budget, near term urban design projects. >> it seems to be perhaps it ought to be part of the better market budget. obviously where money sits, as long as it gets to the right place is not the biggest deal in the world. but i just again want to get a sense of what is the commitment on the part of the various agencies to move forward the various pilots. we've heard there is a commitment, but i would like to understand what the budget is, what are we actually going to do. >> we can go over it right now

piece by piece if you want. there's not necessarily spending commitved for all of them, but we can show which ones aren't, or we can follow-up with you. >> i would love it if there were some brief answers on that to start the conversation if folks can. >> so, supervisors, i think four weeks ago we sent you a near term list with projects that were funded and what were not funded. and, so, i would like to refer to that list. the first page, it has a list of all the projects that we have funding for and the ones we're still seeking funding. in terms of near term projects or even potential pilots.

>> great. i think the ones that i'm particularly interested in are around the shared auto restrictionses and delivery truck restrictions and traffic -- i guess traffic enforcement we've already covered, but looks like on the document that i have from a couple months ago it's 10, 11 and 12. and i do see potential budgets there, but i just want to get a sense of what the commitment is to actually move forward on those types of projects. in particular, number 11. if our numbers are the same. >> yeah. so, supervisor chiu, we have identified what some of these auto restrictions would look like. as andrew said, we're in the process of doing the analysis to determine more specifically what they would cost and how effective we think they would be. the challenge is that we have not -- we're just entering the

second year of a two-year budget. we did not budget specific funds to implement these. the one-time -- any one-time hard costs associated with these would likely be relatively small and something that we could likely identify funds for in our capital budget. the challenge is the operating funds which are basically staffing the pcos, which from our experience on the first right turns at 10th and sixth were pretty significant. those significant levels of staffing needed to make these stick initially. you heard that we've now seen a decline of compliance, 80% of 10th street is not bad. 30% of sixth street is not so good. so, to be able to sustain these kind of improvements is also what we need to consider as we're trying to figure out where we come up with these costs. but the short answer is we don't have dollars currently