to buyer and a bicycle, and you look on the bicycle in the city and necessary, to make a traffic on the street and we are big, muni and taxi and regular kinds and one lane and like a parade and we are bicycling is empty and it is the same on folsom street as well and i don't know why we have five strong men that could not stop the one bicycle woman in this bar. but i do not blame you because you follow the political buyer and whatever the much mayor like and we follow and that is all that the buyer bought, and i don't blame you because you need to keep that job and you don't want to pay and you want to show in the public of seeing it. and i tell you, that it is very danger in the city but i don't care, because just like 2003, as lee only to the congress woman is saying no, and we are saying, no, and in the iraqi war and it is saying he had in zero and back home, we lose, three and four back in there and everybody can get a house for this money and the same in san francisco and a lot of

these, if you remember, 2008, and the plan is called, small muni, and serve it muni and it is like a small car and that happens in san diego now and you can drive it in the car and you can park anywhere and it is owned by whoever it is. they make money you on you and you don't get paid. >> howard straner and maurine black. >> and just a quick l, and so my neighborhood, and our streets are not on this list and maybe they will be on in a few weeks and i just and i have been telling you that you have to educate these people and they just don't understand and i said that google, car share, and they found all of these sites that proved, that there is going to save about ten less parking demand for the ten less

spaces for every car share car and so one of my... and said i didn't know that and so, that quieted down and so have you to do a lot of that kind of stuff to educate people and otherwise you are just going to get in an out roar and we have that initiative to deal with in november and it is about lack of understanding and so thank you very much. >> speaker please? >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. thank you. my name is maurine block and i am the director of charge across town and we are a local non-profit and we are an educational organization, and our goal is to move people to greener, cleaner modes of personal transportation, and i am an avid bike rider and electric car driver and i just want to endorse putting car sharing on the street and converting parking places for car sharing and there is so much infrastructure in the city is invisible to the average person and to give the people the opportunity to walk through

the neighborhood and see in front of them the opportunity to share a car and jump in and rent a car rather than take their own personal vehicle on a trip is a great win for the city and i support this and i like the fact that we are bringing this to the streets so that the citizens can actually see it, thank you. >> thank you. >> and so anyone else, could i support on this one? >> seeing none, is there a motion on 10.6? >> motion, is there a second? >> second. >> motion and a second. >> further... >> i just want to say that this is something that i am supportive as a former member of the planning commission, as we are planning the mark and the gas station sites we were losing a lot of the car share spots and this was an ongoing conversation about how we can bring back the spots and the places that we are contemplating the development and because those are where we are having the spaces and on the streets and the spaces that are one and something that we have often, wanted to see more of, specifically because, and particularly because when you have new buildings being built,

and it can be onerous to have the spaces inside of the buildings and some of them don't want the spaces on site even though we require them at certain sizes and that helps to alleviate the problem and i am a user of i don't own a car and so i do use the car share services. >> could i add, also that i know that there is some concern that we have seen it in the letters and the e-mails to the board about the privatization of the spots and i feel like we do that and i have one in front of the building and it is a curb cut to the garage and that privatizes that and we pay nothing for that and it allows us to get three or four cars in the garage, with yellow, green and white zones that the businesses pay for. and i think that even if you don't own a car, every citizen has the right to use that curb space and so i will director in not being a car owner but a car sharer and zip car user, and so where is my ability to use that curb space as everybody else

uses that curb space. so i will just say that i am incredibly supportive of this as well and it is helping a lot of people live without owning a car in this city and anything that we can do to help the people live in the city without owning a personal car is a win for all of us whether we own a car, rent or borrow a car, or walk or take the bus, fewer cars is a good thing that we are going to benefit from. >> okay. >> thank you chairman and i just want to say that there are many of us that we are still a very far away from having expecting everyone to live without a car, my wife and i share a car. we don't have a second car which is parked on the street because we are a member of a car share service, the other night, we were able to actually i was able to run two blocks up to 16th and rent a car and to go run some, errands and that is why it works for us and bet forea lot of people.

my neighbors realize that we don't have a second car on the street because the one car that we have we park in the garage that we rent and we don't have a second car for that reason that we actually and my car was not accessible at that time instead of relying on a second car that would have been parked on the street all of the time i relied on a car that was available to the whole neighborhood that was three blocks away, but nevertheless, the point is that this will ultimately reduce the dependency that we all have, most of us still have on cars. but, it does better, with the limited space that we have to keep the cars. >> 10.9 and i am in the transportation, code and to revise the fee schedule for the computer and the pilot program, for the year, 2015, and 2016.

did you recuse rubke? >> yes. >> and so basically what this is doing, when we establish the pilot program that you approved, we gave you a sense of what we thought the cost recovery would look like, and which is based on the total program cost of divided by the number of stop events that we estimated at the time and this was an estimate based on some what limited understanding of the shuttle industry, and we subsequently collected applications along with how many each will be making and we also have reviewed the program cost and while we are able to find some places to stream line, we did add the significant amount more resources to enforcement because we need to make sure

that we have the enforcement resources there to make sure that the pilot is viable, meaning that the permanent providers are using only permitted stops and nobody, is using any other muni bus stops and that is really the corner stone of the pilot program, and so >> members of the public. >> woods, followed by wendy,

and then emily, loper. >> welcome. and my name is woods, and i share the mission bay, citizen's advisory committee, and we learned at our monthly meeting last thursday evening, about this proposed change in the rates for the shuttle service. mission bay runs a tma, wait, it is a transportation demand management. and mandated shuttle service the last and the first mile between our neighborhood which i probably don't have to tell you does not have great muni service. we have got the t.

eventually, the t ep will kick in and eventually the central subway will kick in, in the meantime, the shuttle service, which is opened to all residents, and all businesses, and all visitors. and is small buses and uses one, muni stop. and is being charged at the same rate as these enormous buses that go through the neighborhoods. and we don't think that is fair. and we don't think that is right. and we ask you not to approve, these new rates, until we have had the opportunity to sit down with the staff which the transportation planners have been trying to do forever, to work out what we consider a fair and acquit able cost program, that differentiates between corporate sponsored shuttles and the tdm mandated shuttles services and please,

don't approve these rates, on a one size fits all basis, because it is not one size fits all. thank you. >> next speaker. >> emily, and linda howkin. >> good afternoon. >> the shuttle is a component of the tdm required by the mission bay redevelopment plan and i am here to ask you not to approve the revisions as proposed today. and we have also prepared a packet that we have given to the clerk, with over 36 letters from residents and employees and others, asking you to reconsider the fees associated with our participation. and we think that it is important to get the key policies structural and pricing elements right, for this pilot

to work. and we are concerned that the current pricing will actually work against the goals of this program. and specifically, there are really important distinctions between transit hubs and neighborhood shuttle stops and all stops should not be treated alike and the current per pricing structure at transit hubs like cal tran and bart funishes frequency that is so critical at these stops and we are a city mandated service and we provide the shuttles to an entire community and not just one company. and we serve a broad range of customers from blue collar and office workers to researchers and high-tech and retail and others, including ucsf. and last, but not least, we serve mission bay's growing residential population and we are funding solely by the mission bay, commercial and residential community. and we have finite resources and a limited ability to raise,

revenue. and our drive alone rate of 18 percent, speaks to how it is in contributing to the transit first goals of this city. and we are in the working group since the beginning and we would like to be part of the solution, and however, since the cost have more than tripled and they are likely to increase again, our participation is jeopardized. >> thank you. >> i am with the bay area council and for over a year, the council has convened the shuttles and operators with the city transportation officials to work on this innovative transportation solution. and that is taking thousands of cars off of the road, and

providing an important alternative to our stress public transit system the bay area council wants to take the mta and the mayor's office for your leadership on this program, and we applaud the work that carly and her staff have done. and as program was developed, through an extensive public process. and it has been one of compromise. and we support moving forward with the program, and including the fee, necessary, to cover the city's cost. and those fees by the way are in addition to the millions of dollars that employers spend each year to operate the shuttles themselves this program is the right thing for employers, for san francisco, and for the 17,000 riders that rely on these shuttles every day to get to work. the benefits are immense, and the shuttles drastically reduce the traffic and air pollution by removing 327,000 passenger car trips and 9,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions every year.

and the program. and they show that 70 percent. and the san francisco voters and support conducting this study and we are eager to start this pilot on august first and we urge you to approve the fee and move forward with the program.. and my name is linda, and and i am here to. and i view it as public, and the shuttle buses, and the small shuttle buses, to transport and to the mission bay, and the other areas, and do primarily to the lack of muni options and the transportation and the key, and 6:30, and the mission bay shuttle all of the time. and and they are small serve

the public, and they go to the mission bay. and if those people were not transported on these shuttle buses. and we would very much like to see the transportation, enhanced by adding additional hours primarily it is morning and evening hours on the weekdays only and the residents of mission bay would like to see that improved. but that adds cost. and the cost of the charge if it is leved on the shuttles will add $60,000 to the cost which will pay for a year of four additional hours per day, service ta we will not get. and we paid for the service and it was mandated that we have that service, when mission bay was being developed and now to have an additional charge added on it, and on to those fees just feels like rubbing salt in the wounds and society and so

would wo just ask you to reconsideration of the shuttles being included in this. the management association is a non-profit organization and we operate a community shuttle serving all residents and workers and visitors all alike and our diverse rider ship includes, senior and students and workers and they all depend on the shuttle's reliable frequent service, especially for the crucial, first mile and last mile, to the transit hubs and the mission bay shuttle is

part of the tdm and mandated by the redevelopment agreement, to date, we have been very successful in minimizing the trips in to and out of mission bay and our routes have been optimized to provide the frequent trips from the most under served areas of the mission bay and the residential commercial and campus areas, and then, we link those to the crucial regional hubs of cal train and the depot of fourth and king as well as the muni and bart station at powell street and until the tep is implemented the service is improved and the central subway is active and it is crucial. we understand the need to better manage the shuttle services in the city. we want to continue to participate in the good faith and develop in the sustain able long term solutions for us and we also believe that at its

core, a non-profit local shuttle service whose primary purpose is to improve the access to the traditional public transit we are different from a large fleet of corporate sponsored charter buses running between sf and silicon valley. >> we ask that you not approve the fee of the increase of the fees. thank you. >> thank you. >> cruise, sarah short, and tone lee. >> those are the last people who have turned in the speaker card.

>> enforcement should include enforcement of standing, idling whether it is in a bus lane, a bike lane, a turn lane or a right-of-way. and staging the areas, should not be part of this pilot.

and we also urge the mta to refer to the budget and the legislative analyst report, and that gave the specific strategies for successful pilot that have not been added to the pilot design, including a tax related to impacts and usage, and with my extra time i would just like to say that, part of the design of this program, has omitted looking at how this impacts public buses. and how it is, and how the mission, bay shuttle, if, and

it is more the cost of the true enforcement, but, i am also greatly concerned, and because, the fact that the less companies anticipated these permits and because they are unwilling to pay a dollar per stop and be open to regulation that the program requires, and shows that the companies many of these companies are not going to participate, in good faith in the pilot program and it likely then means that we are going to see the shuttles dodge the rules even more than they have and they will idle in the turn lanes and in the center of the streets and sit in the parking space and make the staging areas of our city streets and part *f of why i said this is because i live on valencia street and i have already seen this occurring and it is starting to prolive rate in the morning i have a bus in front of me and in the center lane, idling on my way to work on 16th street i see two or

three buses in parking spaces idling and i have a feeling that they are not feeding the meter and so, i am greatly concerned, that you know, it is simply nieve to expect that these companies have been violating our laws for years will not continue to demonstrate the same rogue behavior once the project begins, and what that means to me is that 3.55 per stop is not going to be anywhere near the actual cost of enforcement and basically your people are going to have to be running around all over town, looking for these buses that are doing the aforementioned behaviors including the ones that are continuing to use the muni stops without the proper permit and what this points to me, and to for me is that, the fee alone is not the proper solution in itself, and you need to go back to the drawing board for this pilot project. thank you. >> last speaker. >> tone lee.

>> thank you, and chairman and both of the members and i would like strongly you this time to say yes on this increasing fee because well, i am living there or not, it does not matter, and if this is a private shuttle, they are using it improper resources after using the own convenience and it is above the people who live in the city and a lot of people who live here many year they are not asking to get the private set and you are already spend a lot of money on the muni system and a lot of the label and the muni driver and they are, using their own, and the people who live there, and they can afford to pay more than enough, and so this is that you have to think, this increasing fee is used and you should think it and because you have to collect the other resource to fix the muni system and before then, many years ago, and they just double up and they need the special or so, and now, already pretty much completely good. and they want to oh,, please,

and blow my 52 is driving the cab and how about the muni fee and how you can do it and please don't raise mine and you know how much people live there and how much they pay? only the fee of 3,000 a month. and the people who chose to live there if they had to pay for it and i live in the bay view and i want a private, too, and you can give me a piece of it or anything, and that is enough fair if you are not going to increase the fee and you have to make the balance and increase the fee, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> and anyone else care to address the board? >> the public hearing is over. and i would like to talk a little bit about what the folks at mission bay, and what they raised it seems to me that they have raised a good point, and an organization like that, in with the big companies, could you speak to that a little bit please. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak, carly pain, sfmta. and excuse me.

in developing this pilot program, the city shuttles and the regional shuttles and what we found is that 80 percent of all of the stopping events, on an average day are made by the intracity shuttles, and that includes mission bay, and that includes, others that either by choice, or by planning department requirement, are operating or contracting out their operations for the shuttles, and they tend to be last mile shuttles. and these, for us, one of the great purposes to remind ourselves about the pilot is that we are trying to minimize the impact on muni and the other users and they are agnostic to where the shuttles are going and a shuttle that is stopping in a muni zone and potentially impacting the operations. is having that impact whether it is going to silicon valley

or whether it is going two miles. and just somewhere, within san francisco and so, we have made the specific decision not to treat them driftly, and there was a discussion and about at one point whether it was fair or legal to charge different tiers and the advice that we received from the city attorney's office was that that is not something that is allowable. while the requirements do call for the shuttles they do not say that they must stop in the muni zones and so that choice has been made and we are really trying to create, a framework in which that is allow able and designated locations, under this permit program.

that we have programs and processes for proposing white zones, if that is an option, that some of these companies want to pursue instead, and the other thing that i would like to mention, just to address the question of number of companies, that submitted applications, to be clear, the permitees are the shuttle providers and these are campus and loop and lux they are not individual companies that are contracting out the services and so these companies while there are eleven of them. many of them served dozens of companies themselves and there may very well be companies that did not apply for a permit and that is why it ends either they thought that they don't need one and they think that they can get by and that is why a robust enforcement program is really important and our goal with enforcement is to bring these companies in to

compliance, and so, perhaps we may see future amply pplications. >> i am aware that the vast majority are interested, and most of them in my experience tend to be in the university and hospitals and places like that and the mission bay makes an argument that they are some what different. and do you not accept that? >> i know that tma sf connects is considering an effort that we have been supporting that the san francisco county transportation authority is the lead on that is working with a

number of buildings and companies, in show place square to help them consolidate some of their shuttle operations and for the reason of identifying an entity to have and to hold the liability they are working with tma sf connect, to be that over arching umbrella who is going to be the designated operator of the shuttle they will obviously contract out on the ground operations but then, once that comes on board, they will be considered a non-profit, and entity but, the folks that they are benefiting are zenga and adobe and folks like that. >> okay, thank you. >> you are saying that they were already stopping in bus stops? >> yes, they are. >> it sounds like