board of supervisors and the voters have all given very, very clear policy derivative that bulb outs are a key part of our pedestrian safety strategy. the mayor issued a document that highlighted bulb outs as a key safety and the streets plan was adapted unanimously by the board of supervisors and relies on bulb outs and proposition b was setting aside bulb outs. we know that slower turns by vehicles as well as improved be visibility between he pedestrians and vehicles. we finally, have funding because of proposition b and regional funding to do the bulb outs and wre we need to move forward. i encourage you to proof those bulb outs.

i want to acknowledge we've been in dialyses with the fire department and he know the fire department has expressed concerns about the bulb outs. i do believe that bulb out and pedestrian safety are consistent with fire safety so i encourage you to adapt the staff recommendation >> anyone else care to address the board. >> natalie verdict. >> good afternoon. i'm with walk san francisco. i'm here today to share our strong support for the 6 foot bulb outs and the intersection near e.r. taylor and the san francisco library. era taylor has 40 he percent of their children walking or

bicycling to school about 26 percent. we want to insure this project is not unnecessarily impeded. there's no arguing the emergency vehicle, however, the currently proposed bulb out don't hamper access for vehicles. given the 26 foot clearance the fire department's own preferred 20 foot minimum is in no way sacred. it's clear like bulb outs which are even proven to save lives are not sacred for convenience. just as a reminder 6 pedestrians were killed in november including a 6-year-old girl. had there been a bulb out in

this intersection it could have made a difference between life and death. it's the most dangerous in the state. so we want to support the upgrades to move forward and do so. sf strongly encourages those bulb outs to protect our vulnerable pedestrians and make it safer for everyone to walk >> no one else wish so speak. seeing none. >> i'll move to proof it and the question is we've heard supervisor weiner and the input in the fire department did we receive any opposition?

>> yeah. and we have the fire marshall here and she'll be willing to answer any questions. >> it's not a compel to speak is the fire department not wanting to register opposition i'll move to improve the item. but a bulb out near a continental is important but the only thing that the emergency vehicles need to make a quick route through the city. anything more from the fire department >> i will leave that to the fire department. i think in terms of the total projects >> those projects go through review and the fire department is part of the review and it was during that process they recommended a 5 foot bulb as

opposed to to a 6 foot bulb. bib outs more germany building we have bulb out that have the same day good try around the city. i meet with the key staff and they're largerly supportive of pedestrian safety initiatives and bulbist they have some concerns when we get detain to specific good try. the main concern is 5 - the need to go into the he opposing lane in order to make a turn and i think what they are seeing as the city gets more and more congestive they're getting concerns about the response times and in this case part of

the concern this is a concern about being ticketed by the police department for using the ongoing lane to make a turn. i think we know that a lot of people use big vehicles to make the opposing turn. i have the greatest you receptor for the fire chief i think she's one of the best chiefs in the nation. she is supporting her staff in recommending a 5 foot bulb. i think we have look at this very careful and don't believe from our standpoint there is any fire service or response even with a 6 foot bulb and that's why this recommendation is at 6 feet >> and how many 6 foot bulbs do we have.

i'm hearing the fire department he expressing concerns about the police writing tickets and if they had we should explain why they're doing this in those intersections and more importantly those bulb you outs will impediment response time. there aren't many of those bulb outs but let's maintain dialyses with the fire department and if they tell you those 6 foot bulb outs are creating the problems we're worried about here we need to look at that. there's a lot more bulb outs on the way. this is a test case, if you will, >> do we hear a motion. >> a second. >> and to clarify this is what the staff recommended. >> okay. so in favor opposed. thank you supervisor for being

here and the rest of the consent calendar >> it's the only people that asked for the item severed. >> all in favor, say i. opposed? >> moving back to item 8 this is the advisory report mr. weaver is not here so the next item is for puc. this is for puc to address the sfmta issues and not those on the calendar (calling names) >> mr. lawrence you're up. >> is this puc that i have any

public comment? i don't know where we are this is any public comment? for 8 and not 9 but briefly i was not to speak on 10.2 because the item was not on the agenda. we have a lot of room for stop signs and moisture parking and no parking any time but i've yet to see one position open up for taxis. which is migs in this city. you can't park around embarcadero without getting a ticket. there's nothing that says taxis only. two is this. very briefly is that i've seen a lot of awards today to the dp d the muni but no awards for the

woman who lost her child with the taxi that's supposed to come into the mandate of the city but you can't control it. i saw not one award for her. i want to since i brought the point i wanted to bring up is leave 30 seconds in silence for her child. >> okay. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> mark. >> good afternoon mark. >> good afternoon board members. i want to speak to the same

subject. this incident is it's shocking but not specializing that hover is apparently denying responsibility for this accident which one of the drivers apparently committed by making an unlawful turn and killing a young child. this is completely consistent with hovers position that it is simply a software company that's thot not responsible nor subject to any kind of regulation whatsoever and they still main that position even though the

puc sees it differently. it's hard to find the words. the other culpable party is the puc itself. it's just the height of regulatory or responsibility to leave the public unprotected in a situation this thing. the drivers personal insurance will deny responsibility. the insurance industry has said to the puc. the various parties that participated in the puc ruling procedures time and time again, we tried to express them with the fact that there were those huge gaps in their insurance rules and apparently still are. so - thank you >> mr. hubert can you ask you.

do you personally plan to attend the puc meeting and impart the same information >> the next c u pc meeting is on january 16th and i urge everyone to attend that meeting and speak in public comment. >> we have one other speaker card for item 9. >> good afternoon mr. wen in her. >> one aspect of the transit that i of all the evidence there's been no medical opinion about walking along distances to the bus stop. well, i did consult with dr. in the department and he provided documents that with increasing

age there's increasing difficulty with walking and climbing and those statistics were from the national survey. so basically what's happening is the transit effectiveness project has provided no evidence whatsoever that the walking along distances by the elderly to bus stops would be detrime detrimental to their height. i did seek out medical opinion and it's increasing difficulty with age with walking along distances and climbing and the combination of the two. now your publically aware of the difficulty you're causing by walking along distances to the bus and limiting and alternating

buses that provide the hardship. it begins at the age of 65 or at least one quarter of the seniors owning over 65 and 69 will experience difficulty. now your publicly aware you have the responsibility to address that. i want it into the record and now no one is unaware felt circumstances. >> thank you. next speaker, please mary. >> mary that's exactly what he said your publicly aware of this. we've told the past year time and time again those cars are not insured this company is

going to deny responsibility. they're saying their responsibility by good luck getting money from them. they've made it clear they're not covering 0 third are party persons. we have stated farm or whoever they're not going to cover it either. the business model requires them to text and there was a witness at the scene he heard the driver had a phone in his lap because it's illegal to operate with it on the dash. you advertise on the side of our vehicles. you're responsible because you publicly claim those are wonderful services. and michael p v should be held

personal responsible i hope the family size him for every last penny. they'll you try to settle privately but find an attorney who will take on your case and i hope they sigh the puc and the city and the city attorney and everyone else >> last speaker whose turned in a card. >> good afternoon. . thank you, commissioner nolan. two things i want to address one the proposal to have legislation sometime this year about having a medallion and i hope folks understand we have a casual relationship with the - if you

make us look at the color schemes the economy could change and we'll be swublg. there's a separate issue of the murphy's law no good deed goes unpunishment. it seems to cut corners they have more money to over the medallion holders. which is to have color scheme standards and only allow the medallions to go to those color schemes. the other topic about the accident. as mark pointed out we were at the puc meetings we were saying they were perpetrating insurance fraud and that was the case and

p v knew it. i'm reading from the decision there's widen room that the driver has to be in the act of actually providing t nc service for the t nc company to be responsible. in the case of an accident the t nc have to provide insurance but how about before the accident. 90 percent of those people are driving around with fraud. >> anyone else want to address the board. seeing none. >> seeing none, directors our on your regular agenda. i'll be there. item eleven amending the transportation code for the medallion code to turn to the sfmta for use agreement to

establish a incentive for wheelchair picks up to make other changes. director reiskin >> yes. there's been a lot of change in the dynamics and this is an attempt to address those. >> good afternoon. the city attorney's office says this is the longest report every written but there's some things we want you to understand about the levels of service that's been provided and the expectations we have. let me move essential to the incentive structure was to earn a medallion altercation and be able to enjoy the benefits of

that while you wait for our 0 regular medallion and that's not in place. we've got a lot of conceive pressure from the taxi industry has they move into the new tmc molested of operation. in the meantime we have a terrible shortage of drivers. taxi drivers also you prefer to take out a hybrid sedan than to take a specialized who ever. and so in order to try to change the with landscape we have overhauled the incentive structure and in the staff report this is involving the

dialyses between the calendar 2013 with the coordinating council and the staff of the transit broker. we've figure out through a lot of things and hopefully, we'll have some things w that are viable for everyone concerned especially those people who need transportation who use chores in san francisco. so the summer of the incentive program is first of all, a accurate to a medallion detain payment for $10 per wheelchair optional if there's 10 who ever picks up per month. you'll not be eligible for this if you gave less than 10 wheelchair rides. and in the entire context i'm

talking people who pay for they're fair. we calculate that is not subject to the incentive program and that's going to be a disappointment heel hear about the taxi drivers should get credit. so until we can figure out a way to quality non-parity debt holders we'll continue to struggle with that. we've tried to think of ways for example, allowing visitors in san francisco to get a wheelchair card so people who are tourists who come in who cares might find a way. we've got a problem with proof. we will 80 want to make sure that people are eligible for the

service and we'll have to have a screening for that. we're thinking about how to revolve that problem. we're talking about the parasite debt consumers. the chiropractor would have to do 10 wheelchair credits per month. the maximum per year is $467 so a driver who really hustles will work toward their medallion and would not have to put any payment down on their medallion at all but a 5 percent down would be sufficient. all of our ramp medallion holders were at the top of the medallion list they all

qualified for a half price medallion. more than half of them have turned their ramp medallions back and have acquired a half medallion. so when we get those back through the legislation it allows the director of transportation to set the lawns. in addition we've allowed the discretion it issue the direct issuing to taxi drivers. there's 63 exceptional drivers who provide a lot of who ever. half of those have medallions and will not be likely to hold the half medallion and only a few of those people would

actively be interested in holding the lease but because their especially we want to have that. we have substantially less what we charge for what companies have paid to rent medallions and that's to increase the operation costs of those vehicles. in addition, we have allowed the companies to use the ramp medallion in non-educational vehicles from 010 to 4:00 p.m. but it doesn't completely mirror the period of low demand. we were concerned about that but unless we make this period of time something that coordinates well, it is extremely difficult to implement. so we went for a full shift and said it has to 0 that privilege

would only be available so long as the company meets 95 percent of the demand between thirty minutes. i think it would be an extraordinary improvements in the levels we have today. we'll measure that we know what the anticipated demand would be during a certain period and if we get a number of complaints we'll evoke that privilege and, of course, we'll do the process. so we can get accurate numbers. let's see and then we're also keeping the penalties for not meeting at least a 6 per month who ever minimum. we think if anyone who's

operating around the ramp medallion can't pickup 6 who ever people per month they're not you trying hard enough. we want those vehicles to be used for their intended purpose. then there's some levels of minimum you would as i mentioned have to maintain a 10 who ever picks up per month for the credits for your medallion and have to maintain a levy which the director of transportation will manage the level of service. in the staff report we recommended 12 we feel that's aggressive. in addition what you don't see on the legislation but i mentioned is it's the attorneys he assessment we don't require a

board of approval for a cash incentive so we've implemented for the month of december and we have an not advertised this but we're going to give that credit in december. so companies have offered to make the payment to the driver on a daily process so the award is more immediate and we'll reinforce those cash payment. finally we're working with the airport to arrange picks up for who cares in the crescent of the city around the downtown core. we're hopeful that this very consciously thought-out set of incentives is going to change the wheelchair service in san francisco >> thank you director. >> members of the public wish to address the board.

>> (calling names). >> good afternoon directors arrest charles on behalf of the wall street cab. i urge your support for item 11. first of all, i want to say we statue your staff for recognizing early that the ramp taxi program would be the cannery in the coal mine, if you will, the part of the industry that's most vulnerable for the pressures of the europe regulated transportation services. the current shoerj of kroifrz is sharply effecting the ramp taxi program so those changes are needed and we believe they're just in time. leggings our has provided ramp taxi services for decades. the challenges are significant