look at the potential negative impacts and we also will under this current paradigm look at our standard we do alternative testing where of the currently the most optimal safest proposal will result in a level that is significant we will work with the project manager and project sponsor maybe not as optimal but meet the city's criteria so we don't say an environmental review so one example the change with the implementation will right now for projects to have safety impacts i'm sorry 50 benefits that address the safety concerns where right now there optimal design will not be

allowed or require an irrelevant, in fact, this is the case when zero high injury course we're working with those projects those promotions will be considered less than significant then if would be the environmental review process so other impacts that would trigger a significant impact would, still might have to do an eir but the amount of vehicles that operate in the intersection that is no longer considered we look at a range of alternatives for projects before our review is completed. >> i think that was interesting the existing conditions are baseline so whatever or whenever it is happening the baseline the environmental review looked at like would still you know

depended on the baseline to say whether or not those are exist would be so help to clarify. >> if you have a street of kind of high injury and fast moving traffic that is not the baseline we want it is the baseline we have. >> that's something to be understood we talk about transportation projects a little bit different than the typical building project that baseline maybe smaller buildings or nothing at all the spates we're talking about existing traffic conditions on the streets that is something for the public to understand when you look at whether or not this make sense to do you know large-scale review. >> one of the thing i neglected toe mention in addition to the existing conditions on baseline we look at into the future and they are best practices to look at generally a horizon year or a year that is xindz 1 sorry -

usually 1 to 25 years we're looking at the year 2040 to determine in the future if american people improvement is made or not made what happened to the transit ridership and the corridor advertised generally based on the baseline conditions or approved projects we know will be built or bunted funded using the category that will not limit the projects allows for mta for the mta board for that impact to the public. >> identifiable we've often tried to solve the safety so - >> thank you. >> yes thank you, mr. wheeler he feel like you've got the heavy

lifting and make sure you did your job the expire team did a great job this is a confusing traumatic for ourselves and the public and thank you for answering the questions of when, where and how so one question when we talk about vehicle miles traveled is that definition limited to sort internal combustion engines or skoorptsd that are more and more popper include the traffic calculation do we know i pay more and more things. >> such a wonderful question we don't really know the row it is just the standard definition but i think as the ultimate modes of transportation including the scooters we'll have to look at that and see how

it fits in and calculate for that. >> thank you that's my only question through director nolan thank you, mr. wheeler for the presentation and ms. wise and everyone it is a wonderful primerer and something that a lot of us have the future the dealing with on a day to day basis there is that credible steep i for one am excited about the b m t the a or f interesting to point out from a lot of traffic engineers prospective and level of services a which is you know theoretically a lot of people see manage that should be favorable but seeing an intersection go from a a to a d

or f. >> an engineer seize it differently it is opposite of what we want to see and go as far to say that is the case in a lot of communities so for me a welcomed change i'm looking forward to seeing overseeing changes adopted some of the concerns over the years with ceqa is that unfortunately it is the only lever a lot of time for the community to really sort of you know engage around issues before whether it is not pulling up close enough to a curve or maybe you know in other impacts that are beyond the range of ceqa and in that regard is the mta's the city or anyone working on developing a protocol that addresses those things outside

of ceqa a lot of times they happen over and over gastric but we see saementsz or so things of this nature that turn into well, a lot of impacts with the new ball park initiative with more affordable housing there are a lot more other ways it address those issues i don't understand ceqa i'm wondering that there is a protocol to address those other issues that people are concerned about can anybody. >> i'll that is is the general plan kind of does with the topics with the investment development the general plan of the city and county of san francisco has in each element that deals specifically with you know where our judgements are for enabling the affordable housing and the vitally and other very nuance areas those

get talked about within the ceqa document but that is you can in terms of what planning makes a decision that is the base for those decisions with reply rap and housing elements that is sometimes, the confusion that people thinks that ceqa needs to tale dealing with those issues but ceqas role is different than the public's role. >> i agree with down the road i'll add your point to the importance of doing comprehensive public roach outreach and not thinking that ceqa is a box to be checked so we talk about you know improving our public outreach with the goal of the way we talk with the public before we bring overseeing projects before you we're constantly looking for ways to make sure those issues are covered and give the public

the clan to tell us they effect our transportation. >> i appreciate that effort and certainly one that is merited i think that we can see it a lot of times and projects no matter what it is a transportation project or a hospital expansion or a warriors whatever it is there is a lot of impact that goes beyond ceqa and unfortunately folks are not aware of other affordable housing bonus program of addressing the issues and ceqa is a lever to stop the whole thing and address those others issues but that would be helpful while ear talking to whatever a stakeholder that they become aware the avenues and the approaches on those things that go beyond california environmental quality act is not the end all of making the project better so thank you very much for all that. >> thank you. >> ms. bloomer.

>> mr. chair actually, you taken public comment on this and so since there is no action mofb to you're next item item 12 presentation and discussion about the commuter pilot program. >> mr. chair wanted to take this opportunity to give you an update on the commuter shuttle and just to maybe back up and provide context to refresh your folks memories for the benefit of the public so these buses are the relatively large buses the streets of san francisco that are carrying people to work and places both within and outside of the city those buses have been around for many, many years though they've increased in number and in recent years just to remind folks we're comforted

with it is a choices of whether we have or don't have the buses we don't have the authority at the sfmta are the city to abandon those buses they have a legal right to use the streets and seeing the numbers grow we took the initiative to step in and try to regulate them to minimize conflicts with muni and make sure that they were operating safely and just making sure that people can still get around you'll recall in august of 2014 a pilot program where we created a regulatory permit structure to manage to try to better manage those vehicles up to that point had virtually no regulations

generally following traffic where fast forward to this past november we brought to you a proposal for an ongoing program based on the evaluation of the pilot and there was a lot we learned the pilot when you approve the pilot you ask doed for a stephen analysis first of all, many san franciscans getting on this muni to get to work not an insignificant number of people using overseeing vehicles from a survey we do nearly half 47 percent said if they dr. the option of the sthurlts they'll likely drive to work 5 percent said they'll move closer to work so shuttles provide an alternative to driving automobiles so we

thought shuttles in terms of travel choice based on that feedback and what we learned from the pilot we brought to you in november a proposal for an ongoing program and made adjustments bans what we learned the pilot and analysis a couple of significant ones to increase accident amount of enforcement to make sure the rules and restrictions of the pilot program will be having higher compliance and also getting these somewhat large buses off the smaller streets in the city so you approved that in november but the environmental determination we've been hearing about for the program with substantially appealed and the board of supervisors has

innovate acted on that appeal which puts us in a position we can't implement the program the pilot you authorized the pilot for 18 months that ends this past sunday with the being the situation where the pilot was end yet we couldn't put the ongoing program into place i issued a directive to staff to continue enforcing the program under the terms of pilot with the addition of the labor harmony position the board of supervisors encouraged us to adopt you adopted in the new program and i did this with concurrence with the city's sarah jeopardize that has joined he is here today and can speak to that authority it is a limited authority so what i directed state and

federal city attorney have to do continue to enforce until mid march i understand to be the limits of that authority and i'd like to do is ask the lead staffer to come up and kind of get you up to speed on what is happening. >> what the next steps are. >> i've been told since a pending lawsuit over the pilot program questions about that will have to be scheduled for a separate meeting by february 16th not talking about that this item we'll hear the staff regarding the status of ceqa appeal. >> thank you director reiskin and tom nolan and directors i don't have much to add but to give you an update just you've

heard this is a second ceqa and this was approved and that program was to take effect yesterday it followed on the pilot the authorization tenant on january 31st on sunday the board of supervisors was scheduled toe hear the ceqa appeal of the nicaragua ceqa depreciation for the ongoing pilot on the 26 of january they continued the hearing because of public input about parts of program and as you can see the key issues on the slide some concerns of the maximum caps and the number of stop 200 zone cap around the city the same zone cap one and 25 zones so folks wants to bring that cap down a little bit rather than an ongoing program we say that it

is a participate a 2 or 1 year program and mta cakes and presents they're finding from the past year and studies of others configuration so our proposal we'll bring a revised something rise 0 thirty this board on the february 16th hearing and ms. all dependent on the ceqa appeal on the 9 of february from the board of supervisors continues that are uphold it we're talking about a different it will we'll cock it will feel like ground hog day again as director reiskin said in the interims we've asked the shurment drivers to continue so we're to provide in response to the board of supervisors resolution and also ask them to

continue with the shuttle that's all i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. >> members of the public. >> request mr. chair two members of the public mark gle son. >> good afternoon decorations mark with the union i have a quick statement to read there are those who would like to make that program a referendum on the high tech on issues like interquality and housing gentrification we share their discerns but our approach to organize the tech people that driving those buses so the service workers may injury a better piece of the pie we have hundreds of bus drivers in this city into the

middle-income and more coming that's why the labor harmony piece is critical without that we'll pull the rug from underneath the workers that are enjoying the working conditions in order to have that we need labor harmony and appreciate the board of supervisors and the mta recognizing that first and foremost we need both of those we want to thank director reiskin for recognizing the importance ever that and look forward to working with all of you as this program continues thank you. >> anyone else keeper to address the board. >> yes. mr. chair. >> i'm having tribunal with that

monitor you want to overhead projector. >> you want the overhead projector. >> yes. would you, please distribute those to the board membe members. >> (inaudible). >> it's unfortunate ms. bloomer is being uncooperative. >> if she handed you thirty this sheet it is data from the pilot program analysis october 5th i've changed billing data that shows 70 thousand stops during october 2015 times 12 months 4 hundred plus hundred commercial shirts 41 percent increase and add three hundred and 46

thousand more and 1.2 million shuttle stopping and muni red zones and the 2.7 percent rate of blocked muni buses you're looking at 32 thousand blocked muni buses that have no place and doing that without a full eir this is not including the blue shuttle buses stopping record to be had and second handout i'll i'm to ms. bloomer taking photographic analysis and last week observing the free shuttle buses blocking muni buses unfortunately, i didn't

have my digital camera with me but it is what you've dunn done taking the wild west shuttle and turning it into the wild west endangering the safety for the vulnerable pedestrians like me you've switched one wild west for another and increasing. >> time. >> thank you thank you, sir. >> thank you. next speaker, please thank you. >> mr. chair that's the last person that has turned a speaker card and i don't see anyone moving forward towards you today. >> yes. so i time to be clear i'm going down the right sort of

we're not talking about the loss but the ceqa appeal on this i want to clarify if i got to wrong stop me i want to clarify a couple of things we kind of accomplished the transition through the pilot and to the permanent program i know we haven't completely gotten get rid of the conflict between the muni buses and the commuter shutters but we have measurably decreased them i'm looking at you, mr. wilson. >> the number that was the elevation report was the 33 percent decrease and the blockage of shuttles. >> so we could hope as we go forward with the permanent

program through the data collection we're getting we'll be able to continue to increase enforcement and continue to minimize those conflicts of the stops making the stops longer or moving the commuter buses from the stops. >> like you said increased enforcement and capital improvements through the red zones all those things are will help to move those figures down further. >> i understand the ridership frustration the buses are stop but we've made good striving the initial study up to the pilot showed many of the shuttle are intershuttle not popping around from the academy of art to health care centers and things like that; correct? >> that's correct, yes. >> i definitely again, i hear

the public feedback on wanting to make that minimize the disruption and wanted us to have the best permitting program we can have i'm scared of what happens if you're authorized that takes u.s.s. to mid march and what happens do we lose the ability under the program do we then just lose the authority to regulate at all what is happening in that situation do the buses go back to the smaller streets we redirected them from. >> that's our main concern the program is not approved we'll go back to the prefiling dates we have no permit and not collecting fees with no improvement and no data and the

shuttle are free to drive wherever they want we'll not have the resources to do that. >> that's not an encouraging answer but thank you that's all i have. >> yeah. i also want to echo the vice chairs comments regarding at least this board members interest in fine tuning the promising panel we have a long way to go but i feel also that this has clearly respond to the concerns that are raised with those different programs always looking to improve i feel like the shuttle themselves have tremendous value this board is doing its job we are addressing a number of intentions like

vision zero making sure we're doing our job doing everything we can to reduce the amount of vehicles on the street and/or making the streets safer whether is it safety for the gentleman who needs to get closer to the curve to not risk an injury those are things are high priority for this board i can speak to i certainly appreciate you know mr. mason is here in at back of room that gives us reports how this program can be improved and when i voted within way to move the project forward i do so with the intent of fine tuning it i hope whatever we do we continue to improve that it is relatively new and will take work i

appreciate the time as communicated to us the things we want to find that happy place we're accommodating ways to get more cars off the street and continue to deliver the service that we all need thank you. >> absolutely thank you. >> can i ask a followup question for for a person on a bus as feedback to the best approach to sgablt your bus is blokdz is that appropriate to ask the driver to pull in all the way what is the advice for the members of the public. >> i think that is exactly right the obviously muni operators are supposed to pull all the way to the curve every time and a reminder is useful like i said this year a lot of policies designed to make that happen it

didn't work every time. >> okay. >> if you have a - director heinecke thank you. this is balanced for the city and consistent with a lot of the higher end goals with public transportation getting people out of private automobiles and increasing the safety of vision zero having one thing trained driver seeps to 20 trained drivers we can't if you want to build a big picture consider the emissions issue overall this is a program that should continue and the program has gotten better i guess there is i'll say to our friend representing labor very eloquently stated that this is

an ongoing process that certainly is my view personally i think we should move forward and hoping we get environmental approval to continue to modify this and continue to with work others in the city government to make that better harmony within of the things we want to make sure we resolve not only for the implicit avoiding bronze blossoming of the transportation slow down will reset us it seems to me the best thing to do keep going this board is continuing to improve the program as we go along for those who are concerned out there this is not going to happen i can tell you from me personally and hearing it from others having a shuttle program is bte