the greatest relative increase in trips are by tncs. when we look at the neighborhood level we found we are losing ground in neighborhoods with the highest sustainable mode usage. continuing on the topic of driving, we know that san francisco already has low personal miles driven per capita. that helping the bay area achieve its reduction goals by the year 2050. while personable miles driven is still lower in san francisco than the rest of the region, we see this increasing while it drops significantly for the bay area overall. since the personal miles driven are low it is challenging for san francisco to do better in the future. of concern is that we are losing ground in neighborhoods that have typically been doing the best and have the lowest personal miles driven per capita as shown by dark red on the bars. we are doing better in neighborhoods with the highest personal miles driven per capita as represented by the white portion of the bars. this slide represents miles driven and greenhouse gas emissions for all cars driving in san fr

. >> this month we saw another round of coverage in the media of our tnc research after a paper by the university of kentucky was published in the journal of science advances. this data continues to inform our planning and policy work to help us target where to direct revenues for traffic safety and transit improvement should the voters pass the tnc congestion measure that i'm introducing today with mayor breed for the november ballot. yesterday, i was quite pleased to see reporting in the "san francisco examiner" that a california appeals court affirmed a lower court's ruling that uber must comply with the city attorney subpoena of trip data. they agreed they must turn over illegal parking, disabled access to driver pay and extent of excessive driving. lyfl has agreed to comply last year. while the tnc provide the data to the california public utility commission, it is unclear what they do with it. the data is still not available to the public or local governments. we liable data is extremely important as this information can help the city effectively manage traffic, potential collisi

. >> we have tncs right now or 2015 just above 200,000 but i see in 20 other i 2050 it grows. is that kind of in line with the projections that we're seeing these companies are reporting? if you read the uber per specific tus on the shares, share talking numbers that are much bigger than this globally and also talking about really putting public transportation out of business. the large increase in tnc trips is based on existing data that we the transportation authority were able to scrape from uber and lift and it was researched we did with north eastern university and with that data we know how many trips happen in 2016 and used those assumptions as to calibrate our model and that is how we project the decisions into the future so it's not based on numbers given to us by business plans and it is based on the trips we've observed through our data collection and research and inputting those into the model. >> i would see the population is going to increase by roughly 50% from 900,000 to $1.4 million? the city? >> yes. >> that is slide number nine. >> so population population w

isn't always accommodating to ride a bicycle or get a bus or, which i prefer not to do, use other tncs i believe ray real serious problem for the city. i hope you're sensitive and i'd be interested if at your pop-up tables did you ask them how they arrived by scooter, by bus, by pogo stick in the future or by car. >> i don't have the answers of the survey here. i can tell you the removal of parking are specifically for safety improvements. >> i have consistently supported those efforts. but you're saying they're just for safety is why they're being removed? >> safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. they're for day lighting purpose so pedestrians can see vehicles approaching and drivers can see pedestrians waiting on the sidewalk. and also to implement a bicycle lane where now they're sharing the travel lane with moving vehicles. >> so you live in the city of san francisco? >> i'm not sure that's relevant. >> i think people making these plans ought to have a connection to the city. you don't have to answer. >> director, if i can speak to that a little bit, i live near the area and frequ

a 2018 study of tnc drivers in los angelos found 1-5 drivers rely on some form of public assistance. this is an issue that deserves san francisco's attention, specifically while the state legislation is contemplating change in our local gig economy. i look forward to discussing each of these issues at this hearing and would like to thank labor partners to bringing this forward including sciu 1021, the ww teamsters, jobs for justice, the gig worker's rights if rising and i want to think my cosponsor supervisor marr, working on employment justice issues long before he joined this board and i believe we'll have a few things to say in a moment about this and i want to thank cosponsors, supervisor peskin, fuer, walton and brown and the rest i submit. >> thank you. soup storsupervisor marr. >> thank you for introducing the hearing on gig worker rights. i'm proud to cosponsor it and did want to offer brief remarks. fundamentally, the issue is about inequality, about unequal protections for workers in emerging industries and unequal pay and treatment for a growing and increasingly vulnerable

congestion, you know, we had a report out of transportation short showing the result of an increase in tnc, uber and lyft. we don't have the power to regulator that is under the jurisdiction of the state. given that what are your thoughts. you mentioned the red lanes. given the controversy surrounding it not that we should fight to expand red lanes, but it is a long process. i would love to hear thoughts on this issue. >> there is a cause and effect. did you want to get to the cause, you need and i know mtc worked with m.t.a. we need a better legislative strategy for state regulation. if that is the way to be we need somebody regulating them to get the job done better than today where these folks aren't the afterthought to what the agency does. there was some talk about transferring that authority from the p.u.c. to state transportation agency. we should explore options to deal with the cause. in terms of effect did you took uber and lyft off the streets we would have congestion. what new york is about to do is a whole series of issues related to income. what we have seen in london, stockh

number one would be local regulation of tnc, which may come out in the form of capping the number of vehicles on the road which is what new york city just did. they have a cap. but we cannot do that unless we change state law. the other would be, it's called congestion pricing and new york also just passed it. it comes in really lots of forms, but the goal is to say, if you're traveling more miles and you're traveling them at the most congested hours and traveling them in the most convested -- congested places, you should pay a fee. we haven't developed a clear policy around what that is, and we're hoping to inform that agenda, but even if we had an informed and something that everyone in the city supports, we couldn't implement it without changing state law either. >> council member williams: thank you. >> long winded answer, but we're with you. >> council member williams: just to clarify if i may, the city is engaged with california public utilities commission on this, right? >> yeah. i mean, it's kind of a loaded plate there. i'm not privy to those conversations, but i would say t

number one would be local regulation of tnc, which may come out in the form of capping the number ofs on the road which is what new york city just did. they have a cap. but we cannot do that unless we change state law. the other would be, it's called congestion pricing and new york also just passed it. it comes in really lots of forms, but the goal is to say, if you're traveling more miles and you're traveling them at the most congested hours and traveling them in the most convested -- congested places, you should pay a fee. we haven't developed a clear policy around what that is, and we're hoping to inform that