Were still figuring that out. Were working with d. P. W. To come up with an overall programme. There will be additional work. Blah blah blah. Plus, they announced there that there may be an additional operating division somewhere in the bayview, but couldnt discuss the location, etc. , etc. Things that have not, in my view, been before this board and are not reflected in currently approved documents. So, theres some interesting stuff happening with this building progress programme. Nevertheless, i do support the work to update older facilities and modernize those facilities and look at joint development opportunities, although the joint Development Work seems to be much, much farther out in the future than perhaps it should be. I think there needs to be an overall Work Programme developed internally and for public consumption. Im waiting for that. I think it is importants for you and important for the public. And then in terms of this specific contract, since this is a longterm programme, in particular, i think this outreach work, the outreach component of this, should be done by inhouse staff. This is not a shortterm assignment. This is going to be many, many years and so having staff to be engaged in this on an ongoing basis makes more stones me than having an outside consultant contractor do it. For that matter, perhaps some of the environmental work you may likely oppose this contract in short order here, but there should be more consideration to doing this kind of work inhouse with city staff. Thank you. Directors, do i have any questions or commentses or notion approve . Notion approve. Ive got a motion and ive got a second. All in favour . Aye . Any opposed . No. Hearing none, 10. 4 is approved. Lets go on to 10. 5. 10. 5 approves a contract modification for 12282r with n. T. K. Construction to decrease the contract amount by 16 million. Extend the Contract Term to 593 days and terminate the contract for convenience. So, on this contract, i did read the staff report carefully. I could not tell, despite the lengthy verbiage, what work was actually accomplished for the 16 million and change that will be left here and what work remains to be done with the rebid contract. There apparently was some work done in the tunnel but it is not clear how much. The last i saw the tracks, the replacement tracks were still in the public rightofway along juniper boulevard between sloan and ocean avenue. I dont know when those tracks will be removed. They have been siing there for a couple of years now. Its also not clear what the status of the rebid is. The staff report did indicate that that is coming before the sport at some point soon, but was not real clear as to when and again what scope remains there. Im of the view that the Environmental Review work that was done on this project may need to be reconsidered in light of the changed scope and method of project delivery and impacts on the public. Perhaps well argument about that another day. And finally to the extent that there is bus substitution and passenger impacts from this promise ive said before that we were in the twin peaks tunnel and doing the other tunnel work is absolutely important. [bell ringing] but the impacts on passengers, whether this is a weekend shutdown, several lengthy weekday shutdown, some combination 50days, all kinds of different options ive heard about affects passengers greatly. And to hear that the contract will be let and will figure out later what the passenger impact will be and how bus substitutions can work, i think it is wrong. And we should incorporate the passenger impacts and [bell ringing] thank you very much. In the contract up front. Mr. Reiskin do we have a member of staff that can answer the question for the work thats been done for this dollar amount and the work that remains to be done . Yeah. And answer twlrnlts information on the website about the project is up to date. Certainly. Let me give an overview and i do have staff here. A lot of good questions and i want to join and convey my condolences to you . Er the loss. With regard to this contract, i first want to say that a lot of what ultimately drove our decision to change the schedule and ultimately the rebid was driven on its Impact Community operations and the people that it serves so that was very much on the forefront of this decision process. Well be bringing an item to you in february with a new contract where the service plan has been thoroughly thought through. Lots of conversations weve had with various stakeholders on that and so you will see that all reflected in february as the goingforward plan. With regard to what was done, a large majority of the expenditure was for materials so the rails that mr. Pillpel mentioned which i thought had been moved by now. But in any case, it was primarily to purchase equipment. There were other costs that the contractor incured that we reimbursed. Much of the physical work was more exploratory in nature. We were able to identify a number of conditions that we were not aware of, that were able to scope in to the revised rebid. But the short answer is that i believe the most the biggest single component of the expenditure is for materials that we will be using in the new contract. The rails that were purchased will not need to be purchased but the main body of scope, which is the replacement of the rails and the underlying infrastructure, including the drainage as well as the seismic strengthening, that is the work to be done which well discuss with you next months is projected to be starting this summer and with a duration of up to 60 days as well as weekend shutdowns so it will be a combination. So, again, were a lot of the decisions about this project have been driven very much with the riders in mind and we get that regardless of how we did this and do it, there will be great disruption and inconvenience and weve been working hard to develop a service plan that is going to minimize that inconvenience to the greatest extent possible. Thank you, director. And to director bordens request could we simply ask that somebody make sure that the m. T. A. Website is uptodate with all the information information . Project information . Yeah. It could be that until we have the new contract ready to tee up, we have not had that current. If it is not current, well make it so quickly and have much more certainty after we bring you the contract in february. I think it goes to the timeline sort of things that people care most about. Fair enough. Thank you for pointing that out. It is good to have a lot of advanced notice. Thank you. Do i have a motion to approve 10. 5 . Notion approve. Do i have a second . Second. All in favour . Aye . Opposed . Hearing none, it is aproved. So. 6. Approved contract modification to contract 12, Improvement Project with management to compensate the contractor for direct and indirect costs resulting from various reasons, increasing the contract amount by 4 million and 50,000 to extend the Contract Term to 1282 days. Thank you. Mr. Pillpel . Thank you. On this, i was not able to read through the account regiment, sorry. Theres been considerable passenger impact from bus substitution due to work here inner sunset and related projects affecting the n line as we know. What was not clear to me was, again, if the work how much of the work is complete. Is all of the work complete . Because the calendar item summary did not include that this was a close out. Is this the final contract mod in close out . Is all the work done or are there still punch list items in sunset tunnel . And i guess my summary on five, six and seven, ill get to seven when we get to that in a moment, is if if i could talk to staff before things get to the board, i could probably ask those questions and work this out before hand. Some of these things are helpful to be in public. Over things we could just talk about before hand and when we get to a later item, staff did reach out to me on one item, which i very much appreciate. So, you know, its kind of up to the board and staff as to how you wand to handle my comments. I do care about these things very much and i do try to read this stuff as closely as i can. Thank you. Thank you. Before i ask for a motion to approve, ill just affirm the same thing that once we have this updated, the website will be updated and well have the most pertinent and uptodate information on there. Correct. And the work is substantially complete. There are punch items that i dont believe will require any revenue hour impacts. So, there shouldnt be any i dont believe there will be any passenger impacts. At the same time we lined this up with inner sunset street work that is happening so there could be other shutdowns. As far as this promise and this contract is concerned, the work is substantially complete with punch list items remaining. Thank you. And ill note how important this type of Maintenance Work is to our system. We can see from the example of new york city and washington, d. C. The impact that deferred maintenance ultimately has on our passengers. We do appreciate the work that is going on to make sure we keep our system running. 10. 6, motion to approve . Approved. Second . Second. Hear nothing oppose, approved. 10. 7. A motion to view track replacement project at 19th avenue and rossmore with provan to compensate the contractor for various cost, increasing the contract amount by 314,338 and exiting the term of the contract by 193 days. Thank you. Mr. Pillpel. Thank you. On this as well, the website should be updated because the dates have change add few times. There have already been bus substitutions primarily for the work at is theth and juniper sera. I understand that there will be further bus substitutions to do this work at rossmore. I did not comment on the original contract when it was before the board. I forget why last year. My concern on the scope of this project relates to the support poles at 19th avenue across from mercy high school. There continue to be a number of concrete support polls that the overhead [inaudible] attaches to athrong j, k, l, m, n lines and some of the other places like van ness avenue. Where possible, i think those historic support poles should be retained. Where its not possible due to Structural Integrity issues or age, wear, whatever, where it is possible to fabricate new poles that resemble the old poels and maintain the historic significance of those support poles, some of which are now over 100, over so 5 years old. I think that would be excellent in the city. I think our historic structures, whether they be buildings or other facilities like this, should be maintained and the continuing disappearance of our citys history troubles me. So, i took the time to just make that point. I dont know if that can be changed in the scope of this particular contract. But as we go forward, whether its on taravale or other places with support poels, i ask you to consider that. Again, there will be further passenger impaxes and it would be nice to have a larger master schedule of all of these big projects that have impacts on passengers so that were not just having random bus substitutions throughout the year. Thank you. Directors, do i have a motion to approve 10. 7 . Do i have a second . Second. In all favour . Aye . Any opposed . No . Hearing none, 10. 7 is approved. Madame chair, that concludes your consent calendar. Well move to the regular algds da. Item 11, amends section 905 to limit the number of residential parking permits to no more than one per person and two per single address, provide for a waiver for residents for up to four residential parking permits that can be issued to a single address, establish permit fees for additional permits issued to residences, provide that permits issued to residents for health care or child care workers shall not count toward the maximum number of permits that can be ish uniformed to a single address for residents of area a. A. And approving various parking and traffic modify diagnosis establish residential parking permit area aa in the Northwest Heights neighbourhoods. I will not read through the specific traffic modification. Thank you. Mr. Wilson, happy new year. Good to see you. Happy new year. Good afternoon, directors. Thank you for having me. My name is hank wilson. Im the policy manager here at the sfmta here to discuss a proposal for residential parking permit area a. A. Which would be the newest area in the city. There is in many ways it is a straight forward proposal, straight forward petition for residents with a little bit of an update that ill talk about in a couple of slides. I dont know if we can get the slide show up on the screen. But the there we go. A little background on the r. P. P. Programme. It started in 1976 and, of course, it is designed to prevent nonresidents, usually employees, or folks who are going to where commuting to go into the city for parking for long periods on neighbourhood streets. Its most important near transportation hubs like bart station or other major transit stations and also parking generators like universities, the financial district, hospitals, things like that. And it is a purely residentdriven process. Its submitted by presenting petitions to the m. T. A. To say that theyre 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 youll hear from a lot of residents today who were the drivers of this. Youll probably hear from residents who are also not big fans and i think youll hear from me talking about some of the tradeoffs and some of the questions that weve 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 them downtown. There are other as retail neighbourhood retail areas sort of grow into regional and citywide destinations, i think that brings in people from around the bay area and around the city who may want to park on the neighbourhood streets. I think that is what were seeing in the northwestboro area. This is a list of the parking pressures from nonresidence denlszes. St. Lukes, obviously a large hospital a block away, thats growing and about to open up a new administrative building and the local retail is becoming more citywide regional retail attracting people from all over the city. The 24 park street station has been there for a long time, but ridership is up and more people are trying to take advantage of that. St there are a lot of residents in nainlds and a lot of them have cars and not all of them have a place to put their car off street so there is a lot of internal pressure, which, again, i will get to in a minute as to one of the modifications were proposing here. Again, section 905 of the transportation code dictates Residential Permit parking. It says that the sfmta shall go out and collect data, conduct surveys. If residents provide a number of petition signatures, which they have done here, there has to be a mile of street frontage. Ill taung about each of these in line. You see the guideline of 50 of units in favour on any given block is usually the standard in the transportation code for whether residents actually desire r. P. P. On their block. For parking occupancy, we typically use the guideline of 80 or higher to indicate that there is a parking problem here and parking restrictions might help create more availability. We use a guideline of 50 or more nonresident vehicles. And ill talk about the definition of a nonresident vehicle in a minute. As representation that there is a lot of sufficient external pressure. People coming from outside the neighbourhood that a restriction that benefits residents would again help create parking availability and then a look at whether this is sufficient offStreet Parking availability to accommodate all the residents in their cars. To go through these one by one, this is a look at the blue blocks here are the blocks that have at least 50 of the units on those blocks have voted themselves in to this proposed r. P. P. Area. That is more than one mile of street frontage and that 50 threshhold is how they desire to have r. P. P. This is a map of a survey conducted a couple of years ago. As part of the citywide r. P. P. Reform effort, but really relevant to a northwest potential r. P. P. S area showing that parking is difficult to find on a lot of streets. The red lines indicate where parking is 90 or more full. The orange lines where its 80 to 90 full. So essentially every street thats on one that is one of those blue blocks that i showed on the map before, we see fairly impacted parking during the day. Meeting that 80 guideline. The transportation code requires that nonresident vehicles be take up a sufficient number of spaces and the way the transportation code defines nonresident vehicles is a vehicle is registered to an address that is not in the proposed r. P. P. Area. That means whether youre 50 miles away or one block away, you are card nonresident. This came out in area q which is the new r. P. P. Area created back in 2015. Because area q was surrounded by other r. P. P. Areas so people one block away would go park in what became area q because they could leave their cars parked all day and didnt have to purchase a permit or move their car. That is why the definition of nonresident so tight because often times people from one block away may actually choose to come park in an unregulated area or choose to come park in an area where they might be considered neighbours. But they are for transportation purposes considered nonresidents. And signatures were gathered to indicate whether people would be interested and the question is do you have off Street Parking available . Almost 50 of people said they dont. We dont have a specific guideline that we used but that seemed to meet the threshhold, saying that there is not sufficient off Street Parking for residents to be able to park their cars. That a lot of residents arent parking their cars on the street. Dont have access to offStreet Parking and perhaps have one space and two cars. S the average process has been going on for i think about three years now. The as you saw from the original map, ill jump back to that, you can just barely make out an orange dotted line. That has been our planning area for the entirety of this outreach process and its larger than the number of blocks that actually ended up voting to be included in the proposed r. P. P. Area. But all the kor spon dents that we spent have been posted toward everyone within this orange line which is bordered by Mission Street, cesar chavez, alabama on the east, virginia on the south and then around sort of just north of Bernal Heights park. Initial meetings showed pretty clearly that folks east of folsom were not interested in r. P. P. They didnt think there was a parking problem and werent interested in voting for it. There was a lot more interest west of folsom and you can see the blocks that voted themselves in and that played out during the voting. Again, as i said, weve been doing outreach to that entire orange dotted line, sending postcards to every address that we have on file in that orange dotted line. This has also been extensively covered in neighbourhood blogs analystserves and things like that. Its something that has been hotly debated as youll probably see from the Public Comments after im done here. And the december meeting were attended by over 100 people. Again, well publicized, a lot of debate, a lot of discussion back and forth between neighbours as to whether they wanted to join or not. And two public hearings, one in july and one in november about this topic. So, again, this is a fairly traditional r. P. P. Area. The regulations proposed are monday through friday with 8 00 a. M. To 6 00 p. M. Restrictions with a time limit. Addressing the external pressures what r. P. P. Was created to do. It does it pretty well. It does a good job of discouraging people from commuting and leaving their cars all day on the neighbourhood streets. What it doesnt address very much is the internal pressure i talked about. So many residents have cars and want to park them on the street. So, to address that and using the learnings that we gain from the citywide r. P. P. Reform project that weve been looking at for a couple of years, we have elected to propose a one per person and two per household limit. The existing limit in transportation code section 905 is four perhousehold and there is no specific per person limit. This is, again, to try to address, in some small way, the number of cars from residents actually if everybody has four permits or four cars trying to park on the street, that is never going to work in almost any San Francisco neighbourhood. The what we found both citywide and in northwestern bernal is there arent that many households that would be seeking more than two permits. On a citywide basis, the number of households in the r. P. P. Programme that have more than two permits is only about 7 . [please stand by] [please stand by] who dont want to have anything to do with rpp may say im not going to buy the permit, im going to go park a couple blocks away. Thats a concern, and thats one that weve heard constantly as part of our citywide rpp project. Its a problem because any time you draw lines there are going to be people on the outside of the lines. I think its true with anything that 34 ta does. If you put speed bumps or meters on one street, people will go over to the next street. Its also important to remember rpp was created 40 years ago specifically to address spillover effects, to address exactly this type of thing. When you have meters up to a certain point, people are going to go and try to park for free outside that zone, or when you have a generator, people are going to spill over into the neighborhood streets, so this kind of spill over is going to go both ways. A lot of people complain about this, and so much of the pressure is internal. Again, our proposed solution or way to address that in part is the lower permit caps. Now, this some of these get a little more specific, and ill get more into the weeds, but i think its good to understand whats behind some of these concerns. One is the permit caps, the two permouse hold and one perdriver were kind of introduced midtreami midstream. It is true that during the outreach process, we did make an announcement and say were actually going to be going with a lower cap because of what weve learned from the rpp performed project and because of what the project shows us in terms of the parking here at northwest bernal. It was also announced at that april 2017 meeting, 1k3 whand e did is said heres the new proposal. It contains these lower permit caps, and if that changes your vote, if that means you want to get in or get out and vote for the first time, please do so. And we essentially opened it up for about a month and a nav. We had paper votes that people could take and distribute to neighbors and friends. There was a petition online that people could access. So we tried to get it out there. As a result, a couple blocks came in, couple blocks went out from what was the number of blocks that had voted 50 or more. And then, the next one is that in the december 2016 staff meeting, mta showed data that a large percentage of people parking in the area were from actually from the neighborhood, were from a quartermile away or a halfmile away within that distance. To we dont see that external pressure that youre saying that we need to necessitate an rpp area. So this goes back to the slide earlier which by the very strict transportation code definition, the blocks voted in is the rpp area, and Everything Else is the nonresident. What we see that 59 of vehicles are actually nonresident vehicles, so since thats the transportation definition, and we use that 50 guide wlien, that is met. I think its important to keep in mind, just like an area cue, whats considered nonresidential or not in a neighborhood, its a density in a neighborhood. I live in area i, and so i dont think anyone would consider me a neighbor or welcome me to park on their streets in Bernal Heights, but i live within a quarter mile. If you go to the corner of delores and duncan streets, which its fully within noe valley and the hospital, thats a quarter mile from the rpp. So thats just to say that the sort of General Information that we showed in december 2016 was an idea of generally where people are coming from, but it was not intended to be an analysis of the specifics of the transportation code requirements. And then, a lot of people doubting whether rpp is really effective. These restrictions will come in, well pay our money and nothings going to change. While we certainly cant guarantee any outcomes because of any restrictions that we put in, what we have seen as part of the Data Collection as part of the rpp perform project, and anecdotally, that rpp helps create a little bit of availability. This is an example from the potrero hill area, area x, where there are regulated blocks next to unregulated blocks. The regulated blocks, 25 spaces available, and unregulated blocks, absolutely no space at all. And when we talked to this board in october of 2017 about the rpp project, a couple of questions came up specifically about the permit limitations and i wanted to get back to you about those. Director borden had a question about in bernal and other neighborhoods, there are people who perhaps have a personal vehicle and then they have a truck for work and so both of those are registered in one persons name. Well, how would the oneperdriver limitation affect those folks. The answer is the one perdriver would apply. You cant have under this policy one person as registered, a permit for two different cars. What you could do is if you have say, a family car, and then, one person has the work truck or the work car, you could apportion the registrations or the permits among however many adults that you need. So if you have two adults skm two cars, you can register things that way. If you have an offStreet Parking space or whichever car you dont want to get the permit for there, and then get the permit for the car that you want to park on the street. And then how does a lower permit cap work for families that are doubling up or living many roommates in an apartment because San Francisco is so expensive, and you have to split the rent many ways in order for a lot of people to survive here. Thats why weve built in sort of the safety valve of the soft cap, so the two permit cap is a soft cap. You can petition for more if there are other drivers in the household and if a survey actually suggests that there is available parking. Then you can get a third or fourth permit. Those will cost more. They will be double for the third and triple for the fourth. Thats exactly how we do it under transportation code section 905 now, so if people are asking for permits in excess of the soft cap thats currently at four. Thats all i have now. Happy to answer any questions that you may have or come back after Public Comment. Thank you very much. Thank you. What id like to do is any clarifying questions that my board has, i would like to hear, we do have a member of staff that i would like to hear from first, and then, i would like to have Public Comment before we have board questions. So any clarifying questions. Vice chair heinicke first and then director borden. Director borden you said that in this proposed area, there are a fair number of streets that do not have street cleaning at all . That i cant testify to that. I can testify in Bernal Heights, there are streets that dont have street cleaning at all. In fact when i moved to nearby the area, and i didnt want to get a permit, i used to park any car on the north bernal street and leave it for weeks at a time and never had any issue. So if you live nearby, its an open secret that you can go park your car well, part of the presentation is there are no street cleaning on some streets, so is it in this zone, there are some streets that have no street cleaning. Thats a good question, i believe so, but there are other folks that can tell you. Other questions mentioned the Elementary School. Does our review suggest there are teachers who work at that school who are parking in the zone that would become the double a zone . When we do the Data Analysis, we can tell where the cars are registered to. We of course dont know who theyre registered to or why theyre coming or where they work. But we have reason to believe yeah. Okay. The school is one to two blocks, depending on your definition of the zone of unregulated parking to the north and to the east. People are parking all around the zone. There may be some on these regulated streets. Director borden thank you. Thank you, director heinicke. Director borden . Theres a teacher permit in section 905, but that applies only to schools that are within an rpp area. If the area expanded to include fund elementary, then they would be eligible. Director borden [ inaudible ] something maybe to look at previous as related to schools. And then, i notice theres a nonprofit. Do we know on average how often people is it that those people in the neighborhood are there for more than two hours on their visits . Do we know the average time that people visit . Well, i talked with larissa dugan quadra, and she indicated she has over 30 employees, so the two hour limit is obviously more useful for visitors who arent staying there all day. The two hour limit is very difficult for employees who have been parking in the neighborhood. Just understand the longer the time limit, the easier it would be. If you have a three hour appointment, the two hour limit would be hard, but the four hour limit would work well. Director borden i guess im more interested in the instance that happens with four unrelated adults that live together which is different that a family that say they commute out of the city or however that may be. How does that factor into the cost of the permits . Is it still the same for the two people even if theyre all unrelated or is it all because theyre part of the same family. So the soft permit is the cap. Its the fifth is double, the sixth is triple, the seventh is quadruple the price. I think its up to the residents its kind of like your pg e bill, you can figure out how thats split. We try to stay out of that process of basically trying to figure out who can afford to pay the double or the triple price. It would be a similar process here with the cap of two instead of four. Director borden and just with the petition, people always say they need a permit. What is the kind of special that you would say sure, you can get the fifth permit or sixth permit. Just out of curiosity, what is the criteria if there are any. Its fairly simple. Typically, what we say is if you have a fifth driver and there is available parking based on an occupancy survey that we do, then you get it. Okay. So theres no availability of parking and if youre two drivers asking for a third, then were going to say no because you dont need it, and we have a oneperperson cap. Thank you, director borden. Directors, anymore clarifying questions . [ inaudible ] thank you, madam claire. Im wondering, what im one of these folks thats rather convinced that less and less of us will have cars in the very near future as transit gets easier and faster and more reliable as we make it more efficient with muniforward and what have you, as bike share comes online and e bikes, and as it becomes easier to catch a ride, autonomous, i think were going to be looking at a paradigm shift. I think the time is nearer than a lot of us would like to admit. And when that times comes, there are a lot of us that dont need permits, and we might be in a residence in this area or in the other rpp area where i just you know, i dont need a permit, and so th theoretically, there might be someone that needs to use my permit outside my residence. Do you have anything to capital on that potential phenomena. Its an interesting point. Its really not much of an issue because the household cap is pretty high, and very few people actually bump up against that. As my colleague told you back in october, theres something more than a dozen house holds that get more than four. And because we have that cost cap, everybody is allocated permits in each individual household. But if we were to lower that cap then it becomes more important to figure out some sort of reallocation idea. Im a little hesitant to just trot out all the things that i find interesting because some of them may be possible or may be really difficult to implement. I dont want to obligate all my colleagues to doing something impossible. One of the things that youre touching on that im interested in is there are a lot of people that dont use the permits, and a lot of the folks who dont have a car are doing everybody else the biggest favor that they could be doing by picking up an on Street Parking space that i am then able to use. We dont have any way to thank these people or reward them or say youre doing everybody else a service, and so trying to develop something in that regard where we say you can perhaps provide your permit to somebody else and you also get rewarded for not having a car on the street and loosening everything up for everybody else. I think it would be great to keep thinking about that and how we do both of that. We both leverage the theoretical space and permit that somebody might not need in their residence and then do indeed effectively thank or reward or something for folks because it is a sacrifice to not have the luxury of having a car on a public street. That might be nice to use it once in a while. When meanwhile, weve got people who need that space every day. I think it would be great for us to at some point look at that part in this process thinking about how do we effectively acknowledge the people that are surrendering that i think its privilege, really, more than anything else. Secondly, and director borden spoke a little bit to this with respect to the waiver process itself and what the criteria that you use to determine whether or not someone is eligible. Can you speak a little bit more about what the process will be like for me if i wanted to get a third permit for my home . What was the process that i would need to go through . So i dont know specifically. Our permit group is the one that processes these requests or our Customer Service window, if you give them a call. But i think you make the request to the Customer Service folks, and they will go out and do the occupancy surveys and determine if there is additional parking, and then you provide them the evidence that you used to get the first permit or second permit, or third permit, and heres the registration, heres the owner of the car. So its a little bit of a back and forth. Yeah. Its that occupancy survey that is different than getting the first two permits because the first two permits, as long as you present the required information, you will be sent a permit. I just want to be sure were sensitive to peoples needs, people who might not speak english as a first language or sensitive to the system of getting the permit. I trust you are dealing with that situation. We have a lot of people who dont speak english as a first language getting rpp permits, so whatever provisions we currently use would be in place. Okay. I think that answers any questions for now. Thank you so much. I really appreciate all the good work. I just have questions about the thoughts that you have. You know, when you think about other one of the things i need to get around, for example, which are those cars that people own personally, and they allow their neighbors to they park them on the streets and let them and i just think if we in the future, when we think about kind of more creative ways because that is a question outside of just the zip cars and the car shares. Maybe those vehicles could be treated differently at future looks at this kind of policy. And i assume when you say treated differently, sort of preferred in terms of getting a third permit or Something Like that. Yeah. For example in the case of get around, especially because the districts are so close. Those are cars that your neighbor has, and its found on an app when you need to use it. Obviously, its not it stands to reason that somebody might park it on the wrong block where the rpp kicks in, where it didnt kick in before, so just some thing to to think about if we want to encourage people tone incentivize peopleo not have cars, they wont get the parking tickets and all that kind of stuff, youre choosing to do that process. As you know, we have continui continuing work to do on curb space. Thank you so much for your questions. I assume i dont have any more clarifying questions from my body. I board. Id like to call up the next speaker. Hi. Thank you very much, board, for allowing me to speak. Im amy bainhard, and for acknowledging that weve heard from many, many neighbors and acknowledging that also that hank has done great work with us, so thank you. So the supervisor is not taking a decision at this time. She recognizes that this is a decision before the mta board, and as been described, its an a resident internal process. Shes very appreciative of the work and the commitment that the bernal a lot of the bernal neighbors have put into this, and they feel very strongly about this. But she just wants to make it known that she is very deeply concerned about the impact of this proposed restriction on the teachers at flynn and on workers at the nearby nonprofits. These people bring valued, valued services to our community. Theyre vastly underpaid. The housing crisis were working on outside of this board affects all of these people. In particular, were losing teachers who cannot afford to live here. So you know, what were left with are people who are commuting very long distances to serve our communities and one person even described it to me that it feels like a double insult. First, they were displaced from the city or from Bernal Heights and now theyre displaced from even being able to park here. You know, supervisor ronen certainly supports transit first Public Policy and would hope that everybody finds their way to Public Transit and doesnt use cars, but we know that there are circumstances that force people into cars and that prevent them from using Public Transit, and there are a lot of people that cant leave their jobs every two hours to move their car. So in particular, you know, around the teachers, we just theres a real, rear urgency to the feeling that when you put one more pressure on them, that the ability to retain those positions for us to retain our teachers just is going to be lost. So i just encourage you to really think hard about how to mitigate that problem. Were not proposing the solution, but we really want to find one. The Supervisors Office is committed to working with you to make that happen, and we really do appreciate appreciate your help and work on that. Thanks. Thank you very much, miss maynard, and thank the supervisor. Im sorry. I cant stay. Ive got to run to another meeting, but thank you very much. Thank you very much. All right. Id like to move onto Public Comment. I think miss boomer, we have quite a few public speakers. Well go ahead and limit it to two minutes. Since many of you are the first time public speakers at an mta. You get two minutes. Youll hear a soft tone when you are speaking, and that is that you have 30 seconds left. Then, youll hear another tone. At that time, ill cut you off because we need to limit time in the interest of fairness and everybodys time. Thank you very much. Hello. My name is eric staten from 22 montezuma street. Im one of the organizers that put together the petition to get the parking structure in place. My husband and i firmly support this effort. We have two households one car, four people. I need a car to work every single day. I have an office in potrero hill. I work all over the bay area. Its not an option. My mother was a transportation planner, wrote the original plan in 1972 for the city. Im fully aware of the desire to make Public Transit work, but it just doesnt work for everybody. So in that kind of situation, having parking in my neighborhood is a critical issue. I understand the difficulties that teachers are in right now, but it doesnt help the fact that we cant park in our neighborhood pretty much any day of the week because the streets are completely full with as you saw, over 60 nonneighborhood people. Also, there is no street cleaning on montezuma, shotwell or mirabel, and i think other streets in the district as well. Thanks very much for your time. Thank you, mr. Staten. Next speaker, please. I think theres a mistake. I asked earlier which section youre on. I just want to the rest roent. Which section are you on . The i specifically want to speak on the okaytive yo . Yes. You want to save that . Ill just wait. Okay. Miss boomer will move your speaker card to the upper bike limit item. Clerk all right. Alicia zarate followed by andrew moore. Is miss zarate here . No. Mr. Moore . Is Ellen Digiacomo here . Followed by gary zellerbach. Hello. My name is andrew moore. I live in Bernal Heights. Ive lived there since 1970 on lundys and prospect street. Were talking about an area that is very, what could i say, byzantine . The streets are very narrow. Some of the streets to do street cleaning, you have to take all the cars out. You have to go somewhere else, and often times, theres no place to go to. I live right on the apex of prospect street. Im the highest house on prospect. I have watched a lot of these uber cars come into town on friday nights on actually, the people come in. They drop their cars off, often in front of my house because its a flat space, and then, they dont come back for a week or so, and uber comes by and picks them up, and they go somewhere else. If you call dpw to come and cite the car, that takes three to four days. Again, youve waited already from my understanding, its 72hours that you can park there, but its hard to get anybody to come out and ticket. I understand that it if i were looking for parking, id probably do the same thing, so mr. Wilsons already addressed th very eloquently the situation in Bernal Heights is very difficult, and i hope we can do something about it. I have three people in my house my wife, myself, and another person whos living with us because of rents in San Francisco, so we have many issues here, not just parking. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Moore, and just so all of our Public Commenters know, when you hold, it it crackles a lot when you hold it. So adjust it and try not to touch it. Thank you. Clerk ellen digicomo. Good afternoon, directors. My name is ellen. Im on mirabel street, and im also one of the original organizers of this project. We first started this process back in august 2013. I had a lot more hair then, so its been kind of a stressful project. And i wanted to go over some key facts about how we got where we are today. The rpp area that we have asked to be considered includes approximately 681 units, of which an average of yes supporters were 60 , and the onch no supporters were 9 . The people that did vote yes, stayed with the yes vote, even we ran the petition a number of times. Safety has become a big concern, especially at night. Uber and lyft are not necessarily affordable for everyone if one chooses not toic at that their c take their car. While we love public transportation, it is not always convenient if were going outside the neighborhood. Cars continue to be left for days and weeks because we have no regulation at all, and there are a number of streets that have no street cleaning. So we see ourselves as a thriving and popular neighborhood, and we strongly believe that we should have the safe benefits that 29 other neighborhoods in San Francisco have as a result of having implemented this successful program. We also want to note that we do understand that rpp is dynamic, and that we know that one year down the road, things arent working or things have to be changed, were up for it. Yeah, thank you miss digiacomo. Peter zellerbach. Hello. Thank you. So my concerns are with the process involved here. Ill try and keep it quick. First of all, its not that a lot of people did not bother to vote, its that a lot of people didnt know about it. The original communication process was very plugged. There are many people who never heard about the vote. After the original vote, the process was changed from four households to two households. I dont think everyone knew about that or that change or that was taken into account. And then, if you look at the original orange line that mr. Wilson spoke of, i dont believe that 50 of that population voted yes. I believe you looked at the area that did vote yes, shrunk the size to that area and set 59 of the people in this area voted yes. So its kind of tailoring the size of the population to those who voted yes, which i dont think that was the intent. And then, i also brought this up at the earlier meetings of not really understanding why your rule is that 50 is a majority. If you all i know one of your directors couldnt be here today. If you took a vote today and it was 33, would the measure pass . I dont think so. Its not a majority, so why is it in this case that a 50 vote is a yes vote . I feel thats a flaw in the process. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Clerk peter vale, nicky vanderwallen. Good afternoon madam chairman and members of the board, thank you for hearing us today. Im here on behalf of Leonard FlynnElementary School and im submitting a letter on behalf of the prince, tyler woods. I live within Bernal Heights. Im a neighborhood and my children go to gondolyn, and im part of the community. Its clear that parking is a big issue in San Francisco and certainly in Bernal Heights. I agree with all my neighbors in favor and again. But i think that we dont agree on the way to go about the process. I want to read the letter that tyler flynn has provided. I have a copy of it here. It says, dear sfmta commissioners. Im writing on behalf of the teachers and staff. Our School Community is greatly concerned about the impact this parking permit will have on our teachers and in turn our students. Forming a new residential parking permitted area adjacent one block from our school will likely displace the staff who parks in the area and around the school, exacerbating an already challenging parking situation for our teachers. Due to the housing crisis in San Francisco, many teachers live outside of San Francisco and are forced to commute into the city daily. Approximately 71 of our teachers drive to school and park nearby as theres no designated parking area for our school. As a principal my greater job