the m.t.a. failed to notify s.f.p.d. about the traffic enforcement provision. the overhead, education literature distributed by m.t.a. contains a number of misstatements. m.t.a. provided electronic signage only briefly and one sign not even operational. upon the m.t.a.'s recommendation, the traffic control devices committee adopted inferior stop signage, using wording rather than streetcar stencils. this creates visual clutter with the transit only lanes signage. the pilot project does not reflect the 60% drop off on taraval found in the 2017 version of the high injury network map compared to the 2015 map. the m.t.a. has not provided sufficient documentation on the methodology used to review video footage, for compliance with the pilot project goals. to address these failures i would urge the m.t.a. to do the following. conduct a phase ii pilot project, conduct a performance audit of the entire taraval project. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> morgan sue, followed by in a -- natasha and how

i think the m.t.a. d that they're onç noticeokç to chae things in some of the ways that they've already described and perhaps in otherççç ways. that there is great dissatisfaction among various people in the city on what m.t.a. is doing and the way they're doing it. in addition to the meetings they talked about with you as individual supervisors, i would strongly urge you ask them for a memo memorializing the changes that they're intending to make over the next few months, and that a copy of the memo be ing#a public file both on the charter amendment and on the ordinance creating the process that supervisor safai that you introduced yesterday, and that they be very open with the public about the changes that they are intending to implement over the next few months so we can all be aware of that and make comments and they be open better, recognizing we can all do better in how we goçóçç abt this. that includes outreach about projects, outreach about construction and environmental review and notici

in the meantime, the church on 9th avenue hosted the m.t.a. for a quiet meeting with only five people there. they've also offered to host a public meeting at their facility for the neighborhood. but what i'd like to call to your attention is, at that meeting, they presented us with this new neighborhood way proposal. it no longer says it is a bicycle and pedestrian safety improvement. that's because we told them it wasn't. so, the new one does not say anything about that. we would like to know if you could implement the stop sign immediately at 9th avenue and cabrillo. we feel that implementing that stop sign would have a direct relationship to the amount of traffic on 8th avenue. and we've also asked, and i have 650 signatures to go along with the ones i gave you last month, for the project to not have a diversion aspect. we want everything but the diversion aspect. and it was supposed to be devoted on originally and now it has been pushed back to we have a date. my only other question is how can you start this meeting because i wanted to have

both the m.t.a. board and board of supervise sources has set very ambitious mode share targets for bicycling in the city. and we as an agency with the board of supervisors have been work on a number of different fronts to make bicycling a better option. from everything from infrastructure that we're putting in the ground to safety education that we support. there is a number of things we're doing to try to meet those mode shift goals that both you and the m.t.a. bore have established and that are part of our overall climate change strategy as well. we see bike share as an important part of the overall move to increase bicycling in san francisco. something we've been engaged with for up to five years now. like every other aspect of transportation in san francisco and generally, bike share is a very dynamic industry at the moment. and like pretty much everything that has to do with nrption san francisco, there is a lot of different opinions about how to do this the right way. and there is controversy ov

where we left it with the m.t.a. board and i think it was in december, when the board first approved it, they approved the overall project, based in part on your feedback and feedback from others held on the 17th avenue stop. upon our further review, and looking at the stop spacing between the closest stops at 15th and 19th, the actual kind of use patterns of the people, we did recommend the elimination of that stop based again in part by the letter that you sent to the board, as well as other public comment. m.t.a. board was not entirely comfortable with that. so, they -- while they did approve the removal, they tasked us with evaluating over the next six months or so a few different kind of how the removal would impact people and there are, a number of options that we have been exploring. we have not found a good one that might work should we want to retain the stop. but we'll be reporting back to our board of directors this summer probably june timeline with a final recommendation and if there were to be a stop, wh

item 6.1 is the election of the m.t.a. board chairman and vice chairman purchase saounlts to your rules of order. >> thanks. >> ok. so i will take over this item as the vice chair, assuming that our beloved chair wants to continue in her role or at least consider it for the next few moments. so, as we're on the nominations for consideration for people for chair of the commission, i would entertain nominations for the chair position at that time -- at this time. >> i'll nominate cheryl brinkman. >> ok. would you be so good as to continue in this role? >> i would be happy and honoured to continue in this role. >> there a second for the nomination of chair brinkman? >> second. >> very good. are there any other nominations? ok. seeing none, we'll close the nominations. do we call for public comment on this? >> yes, mr. chairman. mr. vice chairman. [laughter] >> dig yourself out of that one. [laughter] is there any public comment on the nomination for chair? seeing none, we'll proceed to the election. all those in favour of cher

yes, the m.t.a. as an agency is much too big, too bureaucratic. want efficient, reliable transportation that is also safe. i know i've spoke ton staff directly and the director directly. my staff spent an incredible amount of time on m.t.a. issues. one of my staff needs to be paid an m.t.a. salary for what she does. this measure can open up the conversation on how we can improve the department internally, i think that is really important. i think staffing an grown way tooç much overçq the last sevl years. over the course of five to 10 years and where does that lead us to? i don't know that -- we're the ones who tend tom get beat up over the service and complaints, yet, we can't do anything about it. i look forward to working withñç supervisor safai and others on this topic. >> i'm going to ask for one slight amendment. we want to make this now the targeted torld th -- toward to e november ballot. we'd like to see it move and we'll table this item -- or continuing this item to the call of the chair. without -- can we make that amendment to say it

all we can hope for is the m.t.a. board take into account all involved and open to the ideas while taking into account the merchants, residents and the muni riders. thank you. >> thank you, mr. harriman, next speaker, please. >> paula katz, followed by peggy deets and lynn miller. >> hello. i'm paula katz with safe our l taraval stops. i hope you have taken the time to read the many emails you have received because many l riders who can't make it here today have poured their hearts out explaining losing their stops will hurt them. i hope you have also read the emails i have sent you. i urge you to keep all of our stops at 34th, 45th and 17th. i understand there are riders who want to raise their hands to show you they support keeping the stops especially at 44th. but many of the other stops. but there are some who are too shy to come up and speak. orange untilly the staff originally staff wanted to remove the stop at 44th but they let us keep our stops only because there was so much support to keep those stops and now

and the airport and the m.t.a. are a very significant part of our growth. u want to think beyond that. some of the f.t.e.s, the growth that came from outside sources eventually dried up, and we eventually let go of those positions. so, or did we just absorb them? >> are you asking have we backfilled other cuts with general fund, to clarify, i'm sorry if i don't understand. >> sometimes i know we have contracts that come in or get additional funding from somewhere, to maybe, and the staff the positions, temp positions, for five years or whatever. the money dries up, but do we let go of those positions or do we actually backfill it with our local knowledge? >> i see what you are saying. yes, we have certainly gotten grants over the year and case by case basis whether we backfill them. it's always something i pay attention to, good question. >> i don't think we have any other questions. thank you, go to public comment. public comment is open. >> this particular issue, i have very much knowledge on and also i don't have knowledge on. so, i'm not speaking to nobo

it's submitted by presenting petitions to the m.t.a. to say that they're interested in residential permit parking and collecting data analysis and making a recommendation to this board, whether the requirements of the transportation code have been met. and i think you'll hear from a lot of residents today who were the drivers of this. you'll probably hear from residents who are also not big fans and i think you'll hear from me talking about some of the trade-offs and some of the questions that we've gotten throughout the outreach prose. this is a map of the existing r.p.p.s system. there are 29 areas in the city right now. itself covers about a quarter of the city. as you can see, for the most part, most of the major transportation generators, parking generators in the city have been covered. as the city grows and as the transit system gets better, there are more transit hubs. for instance, the 1449 and 1440r deliver people into soma much faster than they used to and probably encourages people to park them near mission street and take th

. >> per that recommendation, i'd like to amend the date like supervisor safai did on the m.t.a. measure so our intention is to continue the discussion as it relates to the november ballot measure. but of course, as i said last time, if anyone wants to reach out to our office to learn more and gain a better understanding of what this would do or suggestions you you have, please contact my office. colleagues, after public comment, i would like to have you make a motion to that effect. >> thank you, any other colleagues wish to comment on this item? right now? let's take public comment. any memples the public wish to comment, please come forward. waw to line up to the right. -- if you want to line up to the right, you have two minutes. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm co-chair of the [inaudible] coalition. i'm here on behalf of the coalition. we're happy with supervisor tang to continue this item to the november ballot. many of my colleagues stated at the hearing last week, we're strongly opposed to this legislation in the current form for attempting to claw back funding from the

likewise, improvement project which i know supervisor tang is intimately familiar with approved by the m.t.a. board of directors and will be getting ready to go out to bid this year. so, it's -- will soon be ready for the remaining design funds and then subsequently construction funds, partly paid for by the bond. i should mention, these bond dollars leverage lots of other funding sources, federal funds, both of these projects will have federal funds and other regional funds, so we are using these bond dollars to leverage other capital dollars at the regional state and federal level. finally, a small bit but important one, we have engaged with bart to participate in their, the canopy project. you may have seen these canopies, one currently constructed at stockton and market, i believe. and this is sent primarily escalated reliability measure to keep the weather and other problematic things out of the escalators so they spend more time running and less on repair. the street side of the bond, transit and streets. on the street side to advance 0 efforts, a number of different categories of impr

of the 16% of the expenditure growth, nearly three-quarters are tied to the m.t.a. owth. and departmental costs are the smallest pieces of the pie, they are making a bigger percentage than years past. represented 5% of the expenditure growth, and now it's 11%, and that is largely driven by the massive cost from the state cost shift. >> great. drive into a couple more of those cost drivers. so, one thing i've been thinking about a lot, and talked with the committee last year, we started noticing it, about our structural deficit in the out years. this is what the financial plan has allowed us to do, to look forward into the future and see problems on the horizon. and you can see from the chart, taking the fourth year of every report since 2011 that our offices have issued. and it's showing you that in 2011, the year for projected deficit was above 700 million, and came down several years in a row. and in 2014 when we put out the report, we had halved the structural deficit. brought revenue and expenditure closer in line with each other, which is really great. and then

the mayor's office of housing, the m.t.a., planning department, p.u.c., public works, contract monitoringivision, city build. josh arsay is here. bcdc state lands commission, the department of environment and energy. it really has taken a village to get to this point. we're very grateful with the positive relationship that we have and getting start sod we can transform this part of the waterfront. i'm also going to pass it to fran who's really been heading our project on a day-to-day basis for many, many years who has spent hundreds of hours working with your staff and staff of the different city agencies. >> good afternoon. under the incredible leadership and vision, this group of people has been really an extraordinary partnership and had the pleasure of working with. byron rhet, mike martin have provided wonderful leadership. rebecca, of course, has been a great addition to the team. together with dianne and dan, steven and kevin, we collaborated on the design and engineering that you see and all the documents that you had. we took two pieces of successful, statewide legislations to sa

drones may not ho*f every over line wires which maybe outside on the embarcadero unless authorized by the m.t.a. they are not authorized within 500 feet of historical landmarks without operation and especially considering historical landmarks defined by article 10 of the san francisco's planning code, which include the ferry building city hall and the ferry building which concerns for us. also in the maritime transportation security act, there are some properties that are subject for -- you cannot fly over because of maritime security. so, when the cruise ships are in and the ferry terminals. so the most important concern which was really, i believe, the driver for creating this policy, is the protection of personal identification. and there are definite methods to how you have to scrub personal information out of any video that is captured and then how we store that information is very important. there are strict guidelines and how we do that. that the city has come up with. we alsos have to destroy any raw data after one year. so as stated in the strategic objectives for policy, it builds res

intention, as you said, to outline over the next 90 days for each member of the board of supervisors as well as for our m.t.a. board ways in which we can be more responsive, be more proactive, and also be more accountable to you and to all 800,000 users of the transportation system and what you'll see, as we bring out the details of that, will be more proactive community-based planning, an approach that we've seen some success with in areas like the western addition. [please stand by] [please stand by] talk about community planning, an area where we've heard legitimate feedback is when we

streets that border golden gate park because that's also part of how the people access the park. >> i think that m.t.a. agrees with you. >> supervisor fewer: and i wanted to mention that i understand that you have the golden gate master plan and would you suggest having a hearing on the golden gate park master plan so that we can flush that out or how do you suggest that we actually address that -- this living and breathing document? >> i mean, i'll let you decide what hearings you want to call, supervisor. golden gate master plan is a document that was approved by the planning commission and this board. we use it, and we rely on it and it guides all of our management and policy principles with respect to the park. i'm happy to share it with you. >> supervisor fewer: when is the last time that we had an update on that? >> i do not know. >> supervisor fewer: does anyone on the board remember the last time that we had an update on the golden gate master plan? >> not that. the golden gate master plan was a document that was ratified close to around 2000, i think, maybe late 1990s. >> (indiscernible) it w

. >> but i guess that the risk is not m.t.a. or a.c. transit and the risk is that we have other operators, amtrak and greyhound and they need to enter into agreements with a.c. transit to operate on the bus deck. greyhound also has an agreement, separately with amtrak and greyhound to use the office space on the second level. >> right. >> and greyhound entered into an agreement with us pending their agreement with a.c. transit so we're working on them with improvements and so forth and amtrak asked that they refused to enter into an agreement with us until they're finished their agreement with a.c. transit. so that's -- >> so, yeah, that's my last point was that now that the agreement between a.m. track and the tjpa for the occupancy of the second floor is stalled all together. they are reticent to move forward until they have a full understanding of the financial impact of the agreement between a.c. transit and amtrak coupled with the financial impact of the second floor lease. we have been having back-and-forth conversations with amtra

the streets. maybe jamie from parks m.t.a. could come speak to that. >> fullsome-howard i know is the big one. is it 2nd street to 11th? >> jamie parks with sfmta. so with fullsome-howard, the street scape project is currently scoped from 3rd to 11th street. we're also, per your earlier comments, looking at 2nd and 3rd as well. >> because the transbay area plan already goes to second street on both of those corridors. >> yes. and then the earlier question about how we prioritize transportation projects, and we were ensuring that the prioritis are in the plan. in terms of prioritizing our work program, we do that typically through our capital improvement program, which is a five-year program updated every two years. right now fullsome, howard, 6th and 5th are all -- are all in there from the central soma plan area. we're in the process of incorporating that area as well. we're constricted by prioritizing all streets at the same time by lack of resources and not wanting to have every single street if soma under construction at the same time as well. we're trying to balance that need with changes

the san francisco bicycle plan. since then, san francisco public works and m.t.a. p.u.c., s.f. planning, cal-transand sfhwa have been working in partnership to get this project to move forward. we are currently in construction for the second street construction project. the major goals for the project are to improve safety along the corridor, provide a more attractive, pedestrian environment, provide a dedicated bicycle facility as identified in the san francisco bicycle plan and sa f.a.a. sill tate muni operations. -- facilitate muni operations. key elements include repaving second street from market to king street. curb ramp upgrades. pedestrian improvements, including widened sidewalks, traffic signal upgrade, raised crosswalks at all alleys, new bicycle facility, landscaping, streetscape amenities, including pedestrian lighting, trash ceptacles and utility undergrounding. the existing conditions of second street, this section that we're showing here shows the cross section from harrison to townsend streets where the undergrounding district is being proposed. the right of way

we have the department of environment, rich chin, as we consider movinging this forward as a sustainability district. as well as carly payne, jamie parks from m.t.a. and tim chan from bart and i see tim frye from planning historic preservation is here. finally understand that we have sarah minnick from sfpc and lisa fisher overseeing the echo district. i see a lot of members of our south market community here today. thank you so much for attending. i know that the community has been hosting several meetings in terms of its vision for how we like to see the future of our neighborhood move forward as we welcome more office and residential development. so, mr. worthime. >> thank you, supervisors. steve worthime, planning department staff. the first informational hearing was on october 23rd where we talked about the overview of the plan and the job housing benefits. as the supervisor mentioned, i'll be doing the presentation today, but will be joined various members of my colleagues at the planning department and other members of regional agencies. just a reminder for those who didn't see the october 23rd hearing, the plan's vision is to create a sus