disabilities and also per your direction we started taking steps after the budget approval so we'd be ready to put it into place sooner than june 1st which was what was originally proposed in the budget again based on the board's direction with approval of the budget. >> so i'm very happy to hear that that somebody was talking about january 1st so i'm looking forward to continuing dialogue about how we can do this to make it happen in the coming year and finally it strikes me the various taxi issues being

look at that and also the airport thing. i understood that the that the fee that the taxi would have to pay would also be required for tnc and i understand also the flywheel issue in terms of not being able to use it at the airport. >> december 2nd. >> anything else? >> next item. >> directors moving onto the consent calendar. these items shall be considered routine and you have received a request to

sever several items as previously mentioned item 10.2 e had been removed from the agenda at the request of staff and 10.2 d and f and g. >> okay. >> so is there a motion on the consent calendar minus 10.2 e and 10.2 ef and g. >> okay 10.2 e. >> actually e is removed so taking public comment. >> df and g right. >> so we're we're on 10.2 we're on 10.2 d. >> yes. f and g all 3 of them.

>> we're just doing d d at the moment right? >> we're just going to have public comment on all of them. what's your pleasure? do you want to do the ruling right now? >> individually. are you going to speak about alternatives or just one. >> just one and i have a photo. >> oh great. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. chairman nolan and members of the board i've lived on telegraph hill since 1979 and i parked on telegraph hill boulevard at the perpendicular spaces in and on and off for years i get the immediate neighbors would prefer to limit the public parking but the truth of the matter is when they bought or built their homes that the public parking didn't exist i have a photo here of planters that they have put in the public right of way for years

to make backing in and out of these perpendicular public spots difficult and there's a history of painting the area red across from these planters to discourage public parking un authorized red not once but multiple times over the years. most recently 14 feet not a foot here or there but 14 feet of red so i filed an online concern with the sfmta about this un authorized and november 5th i had a response indicating the 14 feet in fact un authorized but noting there was legislation to make 8 of the the 14 feet legally red and i was told at today's hearing. nobody ever informed me of the public hearing it was almost a month after the day of my initial online concern. i

answered that that november 5th e-mail the same night and said i'd come today to oppose the legislation. ironically my e-mail was forwarded to the proponents of this red zone at 845 the next morning so it took me 45 days to get a response to my concern and they heard within 12 hours i'd be here to oppose it. >> time is up but i'd like to hear a little bit more about it because we're averaging quite a bit of mail about it. >> you know, mr. folks told them in in their letter perhaps they should take the red zone un authorized part away because it might bias your decision so it was taken away that was in the same e-mail that he talked about me coming to oppose. let's see -- we've

measured i think there's some more people that will speak to that -- and there are a lot of homeowners on telegraph hill that have less of a turn to get out of their garage than these people have but they haven't asked to have a red zone put across from their garage. i have two kids i've never taught them bad behavior is to be rewarded and i feel like that's what this is about. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> i have here copies of some of the letters that came last night should i leave them here? >> okay. good afternoon sir.

sir. >> good afternoon. i'm harry hunt. thank you to the board for listening to this story. i've lived there since 1978 and parking has been always a problem in in the cul in the cul de sac where i live. it shows four places much it was discussed years ago and they decided to not leave not to put

in designated parking places. my problem problem is -- i know parking is a public matter. mine is rather a personal matter. i like to get out of my garage. if an suv comes to park at the last parking place there, it is impossible to exit my garage. there's a large pickup truck cab white with big letters macarthy on it friday afternoon. the the person leaves with a bottle of wine visits his friends he has a sticker and stays until monday morning at which time i can't get out of my garage it's not possible. i can show you some

-- all i'm asking is to move the sign 8 feet i don't think it's very much. there's one other solution and if it that's impossible i can show you this. this would also be possible if you have designated that one place as compact i would like to get out of my garage when i want to. >> thank you sir. >> enough said. thank you very much. >> next speaker please? >> good afternoon commission. i sympathize with mr. hunt but the reality is this -- two large planters are put each side of his garage and that absolutely impairs visibility to make a 3 point turn to get out of his garage they are his

planters on a public right of way. if you take the planters away by the way this is not just in an,al ye it's all over telegraph hill in fact large parts of the city. it's tight. you do a reverse whatever turn you can make at which point you would hit the said planters voila there's your problem. he doesn't have approval as best as we can see to put the planters in the middle of the street which is where they are. i get they are nice looking, okay? the bottom line is simple we all have in and out problems in our garage we deal with it people park badly we deal with it but the bottom line is the problem he is describing is of his own making and frankly we just can't afford another spot to be taken away it's not fair you

are the the mta we researched the policy and couldn't find it that you as a board should be taking parking spots way there's a lot of people here having the same exact problem and as i said here it's every spot in that neighborhood is gold and you guys take and move them away and by the way the manner of noticing this thing is almost russian we've heard that comment a few times here today i can't believe how poorly this thing -- anyway not happy i do sympathize with mr. hunt he will be able to get out of his garage if he moves the planters. >> next speaker please. >> hi good afternoon. directors i'm janet frank el i

frank frank el frank el i don't live on telegraph hill but parking spots being eliminated when someone thinks it's too difficult to get out of their garage i do drive to telegraph hill and i don't have a parking permit or whatever the letter is but i'd like to know that i have public parking available to me also if i want to take friends there to see the view or walk around telegraph hill visit my friends who do live on telegraph hill so i'm here as a member of the public to let you know my concern about eliminating the parking spot. >> thank you. >> mr. butler and he's the last person to address you on this matter. >> good afternoon mr. butler. >> can i have the overhead

please? >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon chairman nolan and members of the board. i'm an architect in the room and always try to be a peace maker i'm the middle child. so the disputed spot is across the way there i measured a couple of different ways at the property line it's 35 and a half feet and 37 and a half feet at the garage so there's plenty of room for maneuvering and the two outdoor planters are placed in the public right of way and in the face of that they don't exist if they don't have a permit so without them 21 feet plus plus 16 feet per parking spot seems reasonable and there's really no need to take away the spot. and if you decide to remove the spot you should i should make a more careful survey of the area.

>> anyone else care to address the board on this? okay public hearing is closed. what's what's your pleasure? >> i have a question. how did this request happen happen and if i'm a private citizen and i want a parking space taken away what is the process? how did we get here? >> director reiskin? >> we get requests for parking and traffic changes all the time every day. and generally ly we'll take in a request and we'll send an engineer out to have to have to evaluate and it goes to a public hearing if we think it's something we think it's worth advancing i don't know if we have anyone to speak to the particulars of this one. >> but you are saying that every single request we evaluate every single request that comes through through?

>> we do. >> wow. >>. >> every time a request comes in whether it's from 311 or written communication or an elected official we have a traffic engineer and go out and make a determination and in this case we had an engineer visit and a recommendation that the space should be removed to allow the exit of the building and also members of the public raised some encroachments of the public rights of way so to remove the encroachment and remove the red paint and remove that parking spot that was blocking egress from from the garage. >> we see this over the city where people have painted the

curb perhaps what's the protocol? obviously no one is enforcing it and basically de facto privatize parking space how do we look at that? any repercussions? >> our department will remove the paint as soon as soon as it's found that's usually how we handle it. >> obviously it's a concern to the neighbors does it have any bearing the fact that someone has taken an action that they shouldn't have? >> i think we definitely agree that no one should be painting the curbs on their own the determination that the engineer made was really based on the ability to get out of the garage had nothing to do with rewarding or or punishing the behavior of the red paint and it will be removed i believe it's just the one property

there are two driveways there but the one house is where the -- the original request for where the space removal came from. >> i didn't realize that we looked at every single one of these and i just in terms of prioritization it's very interesting to me [laughter] that we that we do that. i personally don't i mean i haven't been to the sight so i don't know enough or not but you are hearing a lot more people negatively impacted and 1 person that lived there for a long time so i so i so i don't know it's pressing to be honest but i don't know how every single individual one would be one would would be scrutinized at at the level. >> do you think it would be possible that it be made a compact parking spot would it

be possible i certainly don't want us to have to review this again and again and again but maybe one more look to see if the obstructions are removed if that possible ly could be the happy midpoint for the neighbors and for the person who does need to get their car out of there. >> yes we actually agreed that we could mark a compact spot we'd probably put a painted box on on the pavement to make sure they stay in the box but from our point of view would resolve the issue in our judgment. >> we'll see what happens right? >> i think it would be good for it to come back i remain a little bit unclear as as to the logic of the engineer making the decision that he did and i think it would be good to be more transparent to the

number of folks that came through today to be a little bit more informed about any kind of decision that we make so if we don't mind i'd like to continue this or delay it. >> as it stands i appreciate your restraint but i am i think we really can't tolerate this kind of behavior people taking it into their own hands and painting that and i think the neighbors have made a really strong case so i'd vote no today. but i'd entertain a motion to do whatever you want. >> i'll make a motion that we take another look at this and bring it back so i would say that we should continue this. . >> motion to continue is there a second? >> second. >> all in favor say aye. opposed? no. >> [laughter] you are against the motion to continue?

>> yes, i am. >> okay good. >> [laughter] okay. >> hold on just a second. continue. to continue. okay. so the motion to continue the item passed on the 4 to 2 vote. okay good. >> all right moving on to item 10.2 f and g at the request of a member of the public. >> is he the only one? >> yes. >> do f and g together? >> no, just do f. >> doing both together? >> nope. >> oh just f all right then i'll come up for the second one too. appreciate it. regarding f i want to say we should thank

the person who actually arranged for this to happen i think it's important that person gets acknowledged there's no parking along broadway in that corridor they used to have it at 8 clock so now it starts at 10 because the restaurants complained so i think a person should be should be recognized for making this happen. the only problem is there has to be proper signage to make sure that happen that happens and the officers out there know it's exempt and 3 that the uber and tnc's know they they can't be interfering with the taxis picking up and dropping off because they have been given a pass by certain law enforcement officials and i think it has to be clear it's for taxis only and there's a

cab stand already over there and it's so far down the block and it's a great spot it hasn't been painted yet so the problem is they are putting up signs but not painting curbs where there's official cab zones and it's a problem making enforcement difficult and making recognition by the public and unfortunately when you have it so far from the corner, then it is a problem because the people are flagging at corners they are not going down down to actual cab stands too far away to walk because they see a cab so this issue has got to be dealt with regarding where you are putting cab stands at the north beach corridor. if they are too far away from intersections people aren't going to know they are there. >> motion to approve?

>> all in favor say aye. >> 10.2 g. >> hi. i'm not here to oppose this item i'm here to actually say that this is a memorial to the woman who passed way and this is really sad i think as a cab driver you can't help but notice the flashing lights on the road and i don't know how someone can't notice that even late at night you see the the beautiful lights flashing and of course you will look both ways and at 2 or 3 in the morning you will not see pedestrians rarely but the flashing lights are easily and it's really sad that this person could not notice a pedestrian in the crosswalk how could you not? i want to say i used to be a police officer

and particularly on tuesdays the busiest day of the week here at city hall an officer actually doing traffic control protecting pedestrians why did that disappear and i think it's very expensive to have a traffic light there and also make a lot of traffic backups but if you are not going to hire a police officer i think this is the next best thing unfortunately i think the officer should have been there on on that day when that woman crossed the crosswalk. thank you. >> second? >> second. >> all in favor say aye. >> before we do that a little break we have 3 fairly lengthy items we'll be back in ladies a board will resume our meeting. >> members of the public,

please find a seat. >> we'll resume with item number 11. >> approving various on van ness to bay street 19th avenue service improvement north terminal and the proposed parking legislation requires no further environmental review and in the interest of my throat and your time i will not read through all of the traffic . >> do you have a recommendation before we start? >> yes, there is. this, as you know, is a a project that you and the planning commission and the board of supervisors approved. at the time of your approval we told you that we would come back for the

legislation of the parking and traffic changes which me need in order to finalize the design and keep the project moving so that's what's before you today and we do have a presentation from staff. >> good. >>. >> good afternoon chairman nolan and directors. >> you have to speak from that one, sorry. >> is this better? >> yeah. >> thank you. >> i'm the project manager on the van ness and rapid transit project and i'm here to give everyone a little bit of background on the project and where we are on the legislation that's before you today. as i'm sure everyone is aware van ness avenue is a major north-south artery in san francisco and also part of state highway 101 highway 101 making it a major regional

artery and it connects not only the north end of the city with the downtown districts but also connects the golden gate bridge with the freeways leading south of the peninsula and to the bay bridge. the primary purpose of this project is to improve transit on van ness avenue as well as secondary objectives that are also very important improving pedestrian comfort and safety along the length of the corridor and all the while maintaining the through put of mixed vehicle traffic and truck traffic down the length of van ness. there's 16 thousand people that get on and off of our transit vehicles every day that doesn't count the

passengers that ride golden gate transit up and down van ness avenue people that live along the corridor are trying to get to work or medical appointments or people that live outside of the corridor that work and have business to conduct along the corridor our average bus speed van ness avenue is about 8 miles per hour and we'd really like to improve that and i'm sure the people who ride it every day would as well and this project is expected to reduce transit time between the van ness corridor which runs from mission and south van ness, van ness avenue and lombard by up to 32 percent and improve transit liability up to 50 percent and expected to increase our capacity up to 35 percent taking into account future growth along this

corridor. >> the van ness brt is the first of a number of brt projects that are being studied in san francisco we're actually in design right now and hope to begin construction in late 2015 and it will form the north-south access of bus rapid transit hub of which the geary brt right in line behind us will be the east-west access forming a new transit hub ativanness avenue between geary and o'farrell and the advantage is to bring rail like service to these corridors at a fraction of the cost it would take to actually lay rail. >> the features that go into the rapid transit some of them are fairly obvious