the city of san francisco, sfgtv meeting of the municipal transportation agency of january 17, 2017 will begin shortly. >> borden is anticipated. director heinicke, present. director hsu, present. nolan, present. romose, present. rubke, present. you have a quorum. announcement of sound producing devices. ringing of and use of cell, phone pagers and devices are prohibited. any person responsible for the ringing and use of cell phone and pager or any other device may be removed from the meeting. cell phones on vibrate cause micro phone interference. approval of minutes for january 3 regular meeting. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> all in favor say aye. >> the ayes have it. >> item 5, communication. i know of none. item 6, introduction of new or unfinished business. >> i like to [inaudible] >> i nominate malcolm heinicke. >> for chair? >> i thought we were doing both at the same time. >> we are just doing the chair. any members care to address the board? seeing none-nominating cheryl to do it this she is dedicated and knowledgeable person. the agency and staff and colleagueerize very fortunate to have sheryl step in. she is knowledgeable about mta and transit agencies around the country and world. she is very artechulate advocate for the goals of the agency and spend many community meetings during the year so will be a outstanding member of the board. all in favor of cheryl brickman say aye? opposed? thank you. [applause]. call for election of the vice chair. we have a nomination? >> i know this is surprising but like to nominate malcolm heinicke. >> any other nominations? members of the public have comments? seeing none. i like to say we are very fortunate malcolm stepping into the position. so knowledgeable and dedicated and thoughtful and not afraid to take on hard issues. that is the bft benefit of the agency and city. if no other comments i will call the question. all in favor of malcolm heinicke for vice chair? opposed? . here it is-i can't believe i'm giving this up. i was just getting the hang of this thing. >> thank you. i want to thank tom nol frn nolan for his service for 8 years. he led through change jz been a calm and thoughtful voice and honored to work with him and call him a friend. his leadership shaped my time as vice chair and will continue to shape and inform my time as chair. our city and transit system will be a unfinished project and changing. helping to create a transportation worthy the great city woompt regoing in the right direction even though bumps and challenges occur but always towards our goal, which is a great city with slnt transportation choices. i think our current and past boards i thank the current and past bord for the work they have done and continue to do. we bring unique speerns and dedication to create a collegeial board and proud to serve along said all och you as well as mr. reiskin and team and thank you to roberta boomer and i look forward being your 7th chairperson. [inaudible] [laughter] >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> let me just-thank you very much. i'll echo comments and thank tom for his services and leadership and i will also say that one of the reason i am taking the position as i enjoy work wg all you so much and particularly ed and roberta and other staff members and susan, and while you received plenty accolades and echo them. i respect you a great deal. let me talk about somebody. i am the second more senior person on the board after tom so normally in the order of things especially with a ambitious person by my slf i would be in the seat but you don't get it by being the longest you get it by being knowledgeable and dedicated and passionate and cheryl is all those things so i look forward supporting you in the position which you deserve. >> thank you very much, malcolm. i have the gavel so we will move on. >> directors report. >> mr. reiskin. members of the board and public and staff. i will thank the outgoing chair for many years of great service including the dubiate leading the bubious decision to hire me as director, hopefully the new chair will consider that appropriately but do want to thank tom for his many years of serviceess to the board not just while i was here but long before that and decades service transportation and other public interests then bay area. it will be a different board after in the wake of your service, so thank you for that and madam chair and mr. vice chair, welcome. congratulations, look forward working with you. not to turn on a down note, but in termoffs my report i had a bad week last week on oo few different fronts. within the muni system we had two fatalities the causes of which in both caseerize still under investigation but disturbing. the first was last tuesday at the end of the line in dally city on a 14 mission bus. a woman was found unresponsive. the woman is on the bus unresponsive. it was 911 was called and corner came and she was determined to have passed at some point on the vehicle. there were many news stories circulating about this over the weekend and discussion about men ingitis as a possible cause of deaths. we understand as of this morning the san mateo corners office ruled out minen jites as a cause of death. we will wait for the final determination and don't think it was muni related but it did happen on a muni bus and thoughts and prayers are with her friends and family. the next day there was a 57 year old man found dead around castro street station. there is a robust investigation underway which we are providing a lot of support to in terms of video and anything else that we have will help us all understand what happened, but tragic none the less and for him our thoughts and prayers are with his friends and family as well. then, shifting gears, last week we also had two bad collision in the city. pedestrians sthin street. the first-these are both on the same day. the first was a 67 year old man crossing the street at 19th and judah. he had a green light around 8 p.m. and struck by a car and sustained life threatening injuries. this is a intersection that has history of collision. it is also one where there had been improvements such as signal upgrade in 2009 as well as added leading nrtdivals in 2014. this will be subject to significant upgrade and working with caltrans and going into construction the next couple years but tragic and wish him and his family the best. the same day a scith 6078 60 year old woman was struck at buchanan and was struck and kimed by a truck towing a trailer. unlike 19th avenue this is not a area with a high collision history and along the union street corridor no real trends in terms of collisions there. none the less, will be following up on that and seeing what there is to be done but tragic all 4 of events happened in the last week. just a reminder, the importance not all f othese were street safety related but the importance of our commitment to vision zero so since we are at the end of the year and have updated numbers for 2016 i like to ask tom mcguire sustainable streets director to come forward and give a update related to vision phreero. >> good afternoon directors. we received from the department of public health the preliminary year end numbers for traffic fatalities in the city in 2016 and before i give a overview of those i want to make a couple caveats. the first is at least one crash is still under investigation by the medical examiner for its cause and could potentially bree considered a traffic fatality. it is important when we talk about year end numbers there is a lot of year to year variation and a lot of statistical fluctuation so important not to direct too many conclusion. over the last year as many know there is a very alarming national trend towards increasing trafic fatalities. all most 9 percent nation wide in fatalities and that is trend we are working against in the vision zero cities. every year we luce about 30 libes on in san francisco and 200 serious injured. in 201529 traffic deaths and compared to 31 deaths in 2015 and 14 so there was a slight decrease. looking to the numbers a little deeper thrfs a decline in pedestrian fatalities between 2015 and 16. 20 pedestrians in 2015 and 16, 15 pedestrians. a lot of the 9 percent nation wide is cons trailted in pedestrian deaths rchlt we had 3 cyclist in die in 2016 and one motrist die in 2015. thrfs a increase in the number of drivers killed this year. only one person was killed in 2015 and 5 in 2016. back in january there was a early morning hour collision south of market involving a california high way patrol chase where the driver and two passengers struck a taxi and accounted for deaths so that accounted for 3 of the 5 fatalities. at the end of the day i think we don't want to draw too many conclusion of this a long term trend. it is a year of data where it went down and up and that is good news going down than up especially given the national trend bullet have a long way to go. december 31, 2024 which is our end date for vision zero is less than 8 years away and still losing 29 people a year on the streets. this year and years to come it is ourjob to get those 57 high priority engineering enforcement education projects underway to change policy about automated speed enforcement and the culture of speeding in san francisco. the approval of traffic signals in south of market and tender line will make projgress and two year strategy will continue to chart the path to getting the number down from 31 to 29 to zero by 2024. that is my update on the vision zero statistics. >> thank you. >> a few other items that have some vision zero connection. one is that a couple days after your last board meeting, the san francisco county transportation authority commission approved the gearo brt environmental impact report. they certified the report and approved the hybrid design which is bus lanes in the center and van ness and richmond portion and side running brt on the eastern portion. there was two small changes made, which was the restoration of the rapid stop at laguna street and local stop at collins street. other than that, the project was generally approved as recommended so it is a pretty significant milestone for the gearo brt, which i mention in the realm of vision zero because the project we call it brt is really a corridor transformation plauject with significant amount of vision zero elements that are part of it. so, next steps are a lot of community outreach will be happening over the next 6 to 9 month jz continue to work with the federal government to get the federal environmental impact statement finalized and then we'll bring that with potential parking and traffic changes for the eastern portion of the project to this body some time in the summer hopefully. so, great progress there. one other item with vision zero connection is that i think it was last week or maybe the week before, the u.s. secretary of transportation, anthony fox was in san francisco to join mayor lee and our past and current chairs of the mta board to announce the federal government awarding san francisco with a $11 million grant to develop innovative transportation tech knowledge to address congestion, but also to make sure that the system is safer and more efficient and there are particular elements within the grant-there are 6 different projects and a couple are specifically aimed making the streets safer using technology to address safety issues. so, we will be implementing these in conjungz with the county transportation authority. there is research support from university california berkeley, pretty exciting stuff particularly anything we bring technology to try to make the streets safer so pleased to participate in that. a few other items, we have pretty significant storms last week and looks like we may have more coming this week and just wanted you know to there were lots of mta staff out and about trying to keep the city moving during that time. we had 31 signal outages over the course of the storms late last week and into early last week that our signal shop was able to quickly repair and get back into order. we had extra parking control officers to address things such as signal outages and lots of trees down i understand from public works. they had more than 300 trees down in the city over the course of the storms so having the folks out to direct traffic and redirect traffic was important. there was numerous muni operations and maintenance staff out supporting to keep the systems running. we had a lot of impacts to muni service as a result of the trees and a mud slide, but we didn't have a major flooding including in the subway where we had flooding before and i think that is thank tooz preventative work we did together with public works and pu c. just want to acknowledge, a lot of folks as we are inside trying to stay warm and dry the field staff are out sthr making sure the city will keep moving and will be ready for the next storm as well. i did want to just speak to the next bus ushue which is issue of great discussion of late. i'll start with the good news is most the next bus predictions are restored based on good work by folks inside and partners, the companies that help us deliver the next bus system. there has been a lot written and said about what happened and why it happened and i guess i would say this, i think there was a confluence of a number of different things from work that we were doing to work that others external to the agency were doing that collide said in a unfortunate storm that led to the outage. we worked very quickly to replace it and worked quickly to provide as much information to the public as we could but i recognize it was very significant inconvenience for a lot of folks so want to apologize for the rider jz anyone else impacted. it increensed a lot of folks and take responsibility for the outage. in hindsight i think there is more we could have done to mitigate it from happening but have it up and running for the most part. it was a lesson for me in how important the service is to our riders. the reactions we got was amazing. i don't mean in a good way amazing, but it spoke a lot to how valuable having arrival predictions are for the riders. we are just about past it now and don't expect anything like that to reoccur in the future but wanted to acknowledge that was not our finest day and want to accept responsibility for that. two more quick things. one is that mayor lee along with mayors from a number of different cities including los angeles, portlands and seattle made a joint request last week to automobile mrfer inviting to improve pricing and specifications of existing electric vehicles for use in all municipal fleets to help reduce fuel and maintenance costs. obviously most the transit fleet is electric so we know this but much of the non revenue and rest of city fleets and city fleets across the country are not. to the extent we can move those vehicles rks which are necessary to our performing city service so we can move those to the zero emission electric vehicles that have a impact on greenhouse kbas reduce reliance on fossil fuel, reduce air pollution and quality and reduce maintenance. a lot of folks look to san francisco as a leader because we have a mission free power from hetch hetchy that powers the majority of our muni system and city buildings so i think mayor lee was able to exempify great leadership but have this not just be san francisco's voice but bring together a coalition of cities to advance for this. there are plenty of products out there for passenger vehicles and sedans. there are increasingly a number of electric buses starting to come on the market. this push was to broaden the market to more municipal fleets. many of the heavy duty truck jz other equipment we use or agencies like public works departments or parks departments, there are not electric vehicles available for those fleets so this was a push from the mayor to the manufacturers to expand their repertoire. and finally, speaking of zero emission vehicles, i was pleased to be joined by former chair nolan, then chair nolan last friday with our director of transit john hailey and his team to welcome thest if of ow neurlight-rail vehicles to san francisco. it arrived over night in our metro east facility from sacramento. this produced by see mans and the first of 260 new light-rail vehicles we are in contract for. it was 2 and a half years in the making to get to this point from developing the first specification and request for pro posal and bringing the contract for your consideration and finally for the board of supervisors approval and exhaustive planning and design and quality assurance, public vetting to get to the point where we have our first vehicle here that is dollar irfbed, which is great. i remiped you the first two traunchs of 6 or 24 vehicles by the end of nest year and 40 after that are expansion vehicles so will be adding to the fleet and starting around 2121 the vehicles after that will replace the current fleet under the current schedule so we will have more light-rail vehicles in service starting later this year after the first vehicle goes through its paces and safety certifications, but very exciting moment and huge mile stone for the agency. i want to credit john hailey for his extraordinary effort to get the project to this point and look forward to more vehicles rolling in and hitting revenue service later this year. that conclude my report. >> thank you, thank you very much director reiskin. i know the new light-rail vehicles will do what the buses have with fewer break downs and more comfortable. thank you for highlighting the next bus issue. i completely can appreciate and empathize in the pain that caused riders. how reliant on the on time arrival can't be overstated so glad we will have that cleaned up. it reminded us again when you first came on board how a schedule if you have predictable reliable service and you got on time demand and arrival information a schedule becomes pointless and watching everybody trying to figure out the schedules on the buses i appreciated the fact the mta blog published the schedule so people had a idea of the headway. directors any questions or comments? seeing none, mrs. boomerpublic comment? >> yes, cathy deluca. a opportunity for members to address matters or presented by mr. reiskin. >> good afternoon chair brinkman and former chair nolan and directors and director reiskin. cathy deluca the policy and program director at walk san francisco and you might not be surprised to hear me today here to urge you all to be vision zero campions in 2017. that is my message to you today. 29 people were killed last year on the streets and only two fewer than the year before and not a big chaimpg. we need every tool in the arsenal and every leader in the public bodies. eerfben though the pedestrian numbers went down pedestrians make up over half of everyone killed so suffer disproportionate impacts. of the pedestrians we see a huge proportion of seniors. 75 percent of the pedestrians killed last year were 60 or older so still have a major goal to reach here. what i will ask you all today and every other time i come before you is this year to use this power that you have in the position to make sure that the projects that come before you save lives on our street. i urge you not tew proouv projects if they don't make the streets safer. i urge you not to approve projects with compromises to safety. i would urge you to push staff to bring projects before you that have the most robust safety treatments possible in a comprehensive way. you will see a lot of projects this year along high injury corridors so will have a lot of opportunity to flex your vision zero muscles. folsom, howard and 6th street and taraval so we need you. everyone who walks bike squz takes transit on the streets we need you. walk san francisco is here to support you in the work. the vision zero coalition is here to support you so with your leadership and commitment i look forward to 2017 being different. thank you. >> madam chair that is the last person who indicated interest to address you on topics presented by mr. reiskin. >> thank you. item 8, citizen advisory counsel report. madam chair and directors the cac chair isn't here so no report. item 9, public comment. opportunities to address within the jurisdiction and not on todays calendarment we will start with lawrence paul followed by robert [inaudible] >> madam chair and former chair nolan and directors, just disclose own a taxi medallion and my medallgen i know is at arrow and green and city wide over the years and i believe that a medallion owner or speak about this that i'm also speaking in the presence of at least economically of the tnc's that rubundant in our streets. and i wanted to first just mention that i'm aware that the city is trying everything it can do to cut back on costs and raise more revenue and the initial medallion sale and from what i was told a couple years ago by michael harris that several hundred medallions were sold and know this is a revenue stream-previous revenue stream for the mta. and, so what i'm appealing today for is the previous proposal that was brought to the board with respect to selling the medallions to companies. i know the initial medallion sale was done as a pilot study and turned out to be a very fine revenue stream and i think that with all of the market forces i respectfully request we revisit that at some point in the near future. and thank you for listening. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> robert [inaudible] followed by mark grewburg. >> good afternoon. it is funny how everything always collides. you have never done an environmental study on tnc's, but since there are approximately 45,000 tnc's that operate on a regular basis in the city and we get these figures from the airport so we are all in the same boat, i urge you to do a environmental study because nobody else is going to do it. and the next think you could do is then start putting pressure to reduce the numbers to a workable majority of maybe 5,000. which sound a enormous amount, but 5,000. but my main suggestion is this, you have to be proactive today and what is proactive is you have to look to all these tech companies and ask for bids for driverless taxis in this city. and the reason i'm saying that because actually they form a perfect partnership with taxis, with drivers in them. the supervisors last year said that the population of seniors is going to reach 40 percent in san francisco over the next 20 years and most of those people will not be able to use driverless taxis because they need somebody to help them get in, get out and actually understand where they want to go. so, they could bow a perfect partnership, but it is up to you to go and ask tech people. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> mark grewburg, mar cello [inaudible] followed by adam pav locka. >> thank you. congratulations to chair brinkman to vice chair heinicke, best wishes to former chair nolan. i want to speak on behalf the san francisco taxi workers alliance. i want to put forward some ideas that we will present in a more formal fashion but i wanted to start getting thise out there, ways of improving taxi driver income. this is something that is vital to the future and the existence of a taxi industry in san francisco. if we can't find ways for drivers to make more money, we are not going to have drivers. so, these are some ideas we have come up and maybe others but i wanted to put them out there. first significantly increase the number of taxi stands. we pulled our membership and have a long list and will be providing that to the mta taxi stands. take taxis out of circulation. row deuce congestion, reduce emissions and possibly improve safety. imlment the system for sharing taxi rides. this has been discussed and discussed and it can and should be done. establish a system of taxi vouchers or online accounts for city employees. cut down on the number of vehicles you need for city employees. develop a universal taxi voucher our own line paying system on all cabs. this is different than a app or e system. explore ways for taxis to compliment the muni services. this is a idea we brouched years ago and never wnt anywhere but the technology we have now it is very doable. >> thank you. >> mar chela [inaudible] adam pavlocka followed by carl [inaudible] who is the last person bhoo who turned in a speak er card. >> directors good afternoon. my name is marcelo [inaudible] long time member the taxi industry. this month is my 28 anniversary. the mockery and nudge of the taxi industry started right here at city hall when mayor lee took the position to support uber and lift. it is public knowledge in the state of the city address in 2013, mayor lee not only praised uber and lift, he proclaimed july 13, lift day. the only reason you don't have jurisdiction over tnc is because mayor lee gave it to [inaudible] declined your accommodations on insurance, the environment and unanimously adopted the definition of leased vehicles and perjury vehicles driven for tnc is one in the same. this is your city . there are 45 thousand tnc operating here and they are clogging your streets and destroying your infrastructure and the only thing they give back is foul air. it is so unfair for mayor lee and the mta to continue charging medallion renewal fees at the same time he promote jz facilitates competition. i urge you to wave all medallion fees to holdser jz urge you to tell mayor lee the only way for the san francisco taxi industry to sur vive is limit the numbers. the city must work with the mta. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> adam [inaudible] followed by carl [inaudible] those are the last two speakers. >> hello. i'm here to talk about the sfmta 4th speak project between 4th and zoe. wealth street was close td. hearing everyone speak about vision zero you sound hypocritical because the last 2 weeks the sfmta refused to enforce no parking and inaction made a one way street two way. there has been no mandate for having a flag man there to direct traffic while two way traffic goes down a one way street. dpp has been called and been told and told us, we don't have any record of this and not going to enforce. various messages have been sent including up to last friday to am reiskin as well as his subordinates. we keep laering this will be taken care of, it isn't. this morning when i left for work at 9:30 there were 9 cars parked blocking one lane of traffic making it a one way streets. the contractors were there or supposed to be there at 7 a.m. and reports say work started at 3:30 so the contractors isn't enforcing and sfmta isn't if forcing. if this isn't a city project you would lead on the contractors to follow the blue book and have enforcement there. all i can do that is intention it be pushing two way traffic down a one way street with no protection, no signs, no enforcement and no flagman. what are you going to do about this? >> thank you. mr. reiskin could we have someone follow up with him and get contact information and see if we can address that situation? >> we will and got e-mail about this and have staff following up today as well. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> carlmic murdo is the last speaker. >> medallion renewal fee issuement our monthly lease income plummeted by 80 percent the last 4 years. many medallion holdererize going deep into debt and worse. at the last board meetsing there was a suggestion to advantage medallion holders over others. that is unfair, we are all suffering greatly. last thursday january 12 there was a article in the chronicle saying uber is crushing taxi but muni ridership is up 3 percent so the spokes person says tnc isn't - here is quhie i think you should regard the tnc as foes and not friends. they are public safety and traffic jam problems caused by tnc. the carpooling models and [inaudible] will cause problems going forward. finally, you could be selling 500 medallions a year andmericing $1.25 billion if you get 80 percent the tnc's off the road so costing you money. enforce the state law on the books for 85 years requiring transportation for vehicles to have commercial license plates and insurance. the vehicles with the tnc logo are committing insurance fraud. this is illegal practice and aids and abets drivers under pricing taxi by greatly reducing overhead. it is legal to enforce state law. if you are encouraged to do so you may get 80 percent of the vehicles ouf the road. fly wheel sued uber over antitrust violation. uber sells rides below cost and subsidize driver jz reports billions in losses. i note the sf bay guardian had a gument years ago against the sf [inaudible] to conclude-thank you very much. jerk anymore public comment on this item? seeing none, closed. can we move on. >> consent calendar, the considers are retune unless a board or member of the public serves or considered separately. i heard no requests that a member of the mublic wishes to have a item severed and not from the board. >> approval. >> second. all in favor aye. opposed? the ayes have it consent calendar is passed. ite >> itedm 11, the regular calendar. implement the dolores median pilot for 16 months and approve traffic modifications associated with the pilot. >> i think we have mr. nox white presenting. >> good afternoon. congratulations. john knox white and planning section program manager for sfmta and working on the project nearly two years we are here with a update and overview with proposed implementation for a pilot project that would authorize parking alongside the dolores street center medians between 14th and 18th streets on friday evening, saturday early morning to noon and sundays all day. this is the location and the time at which this practice has a historically occurred in the area but it will allow implementing this and signing it allow to provide daylighting and pulling the parking back from the ends of the medians that provide significant pedestrian and transportation safety impacts otaerointersections and also provide much better public safety and specifically fire access to the neighborhood, which is currently impacted when vehicles have shortened turn radius because people parking up to and into the intersection. when we were here in august we recommended a 12 month pilot and today we are recommending a 16th month duration which will be a 12 month pilot and allow us to see how the pilot rolls out over a entire year and provides 4 months and and allow evaluations. again, we have a map in the presentation that was in your package showing it is just the medians between 14th and 18th street. a quick overview where we have been. we had a 9 month committee work, which evolved over 7 meetings with community stakeholders from community organizations, resident and business and park users. we conducted a community survey that spoke to all people who traveled to that neighborhood, but focused heavily on the residents. the outcomes as you recall of the survey, was less than a majority of the residents of the neighborhood were opposed it formalizing or removing all the packing. in the end there is stronger support among residents to remove parking but heard from community organizations and small business community they prefer to allow it to happen so felt the pimet recommended in august and body approved moving forward represented a compromise that was supported by a majority of the stakeholders across the board. so, today we are here with request to legislate that pilot. there were two items this board highlighted. at that time one of which looked at parking management strategies as a part of the pilot. our parking group has already started to look at those and identified really the parking manager and strategies and regulations actually exist on all but one block of the area around that. have identified places in which those regulations could be expanded to different days or hours to have that impact and that will be something we will consider over the course of the pilot as well. and then the second item was insuring there was format for community input so we proposed as we did at the time a quarterly stakeholder committee to which we will report out and meetings will be public so anyone interested in the issue can hear how it is going and will be a place to hear from the community as to how they feel it is going and the impacts they feel this had. one of the issues we had through the process is finding business owners who are busy running the businesses who also want to participate. i knew it started with a p. participated in lots of meetings and so we will be going to the neighborhood on a quarterly basis to fiend out from the business squz other s how they feel this is going so we are not just hearing from 4 or 5 people but have a real sense of the area. so, as we talked about in august, the goals of the pilot which we believe this recommendation meets is to increase the clarity and understanding of when parking regulation allow for parking and when they don't. we believe that not only will this clarify a lot of conclusion whether you are allowed to park in the area by telling you can, it will bring about what we feel is the feeling of fairness in which it will be clear anybody who wants to use this parking during the parking hours is allowed to do so. again, as we daylight the intersections there are safety impacts that will make it safer at the intersections for all users whether walking biking or dribeing and by setting final hours it will clarify when you can expect to be towed and our cited for parking late at night and should help cut down and hopefully eliminate all of the-not all of the but occasional cars sitting in the dark in the middle of deloris street. so far we haven't had collisions related to that but a matter of time. with that we submit-sorry, we have worked with enforcement folks. if sl a concern to the community it is related to will you enforce this. it is obvious, historically we deprioritized enforcement arond the median jz have commitment of the enforcement staff for the first 2 to 3 month weez will be proactively on site enforcing the hours. the intention is give arfbd everybody a heads up that enforcement is about to begin so people are not surprised and dont have lots of complaints about citations but very quickly we want people to understand once the hours are done enforcement happens and to set a expectation there is no parking in places that are not signed during hours they are not signed. with that, that our report. >> i would like to thank juliet wilson who has done most the job on this i brian [inaudible] >> thank you very much. just a clarify ing question for me before i ask my fellow directors for any questions, this is reducing the amount of parking space and decreasing by 1 half a spot? >> yes. there will be effectively 50 percent decrease. >> the spots were people formally were parking and anticipating they would have no enforcement those curbs will be painted red? >> yes. >> people are not just demanding on the signs, the curbs are painting red? >> yes. >> directors questions or clarifying comments before we move to public chaument? >> thank you mr. knox white. >> two members of the public are here to address you [inaudible] >> thank you. madam chairperson and directors. my name is stefonlaser and lives on dolen street off delorss over 24 years. i prefer no [inaudible] parking i realize given all the factors a compromise is necessary. i think the proposed plan is reasonable but request you consider one change and that is that the sunday parking end at 4 p.m. instead of 6 p.m. i ask that for safety reasons. during part of the year it is dark before 6 pmp causing a hazard for drivers. i'm well aware of the parking and still all most hit cars in the dark. i met with john knox white in november and this is something we discussed. high did not specifically recommend the change he agreed my suggestion was reasonable given the safety issue. regarding the specific implementation i am glad to see there is a plan to do a 30 day, one month grace period because i was concerned what would happen there. the other thing i would request is that i would like sfmta to attempt to facilitate agreement between the archdiocese and synagogue that allows the two mission deloris parking lots. this can eliminate the parking and give the synagogue flexibility. there was discussion some time ago but agreement couldn't be reached. same applies to deloris park church and board of education. they used to be able to use the parking lot across the street and suddenly the fall the new principle decided they couldn't without warning. i ask the city try to facilitate some agreement there. i respectfully ask you consider my suggestions. thank you. >> thank you. thank you for your continued input. >> [inaudible] anyone else wishes to address the board if you can make your way to the front or turn in a speaker card. >> good afternoon board members. congrat ylshzs chairman brinkman and thank you chairman nolan, outgoing. [inaudible] associate pastor of cornerstone church and part the committee john knox white and team helped facilitate over two years and thank john and juliet and team facilitating a job for a challenges process. i do want to say i think fellow faith organization members are not able to make it today but i think without formally speaking on their behalf we are supportive of the pilot project and believe this is a compromise for the neighborhoods and faith communities and i think everyone just to communicate to the neighborhoods this will beope toon the general mublic whether going to the restaurants or shopping or faith organizations and i just want to reiterate that i believe it is communicate today the board that the small business administration san francisco has also supported this pilot project and legalization the median parking on dolores. i believe it was brought up at the last board meeting. one reason the data hasn't skewed too much is the gentrification that happened with the people of faith organizations who had to move out and drivering into the city is the only opportunity for them to attend their faith organizations. once again, i want to say thank you and hope you consider-also, my church actually is part that-parks on cuvaro and independent of the pilot decision so i was under the impression it is a same decision for dolores-thank you. >> thank you. mr. knox, white, a follow up question in light of mr. luzars comment. i see that the dates and times the parking is permitted-friday until 10 p.m. saturday at noon and sunday 6 p.m. do you want to to the twie lite dark dusk issue there? >> sure, it was something we talked about. as we wept through the conversation even with the committee even though we didn't come to a conclusion there, we looked at everything from adding full day saturday parking to really limiting things to sunday mornings and in that conversation i think what staff came to is the idea of trying to formalize a solution that honored the current and existing circumstances so parking hapbs past 6 o'clock we thought 6 o'clock represented in the hour a reasonable hour that isn't too dark and maybe one hour of darkness in the evening and couple months for a year. we couldn't find data that suggested people were running into the backs of the cars so a outcome evaluating this is whether at 6 o'clock there are no car thrz which suggests we should pull the hours sknack there isn't a damd for that. i think we felt the issue was single cars in the dark than it was a row of 10 cars parked there in the dark. >> good. thank you. directors, questions, discussion? >> i had a few. >> please. >> thank you very much, mr. knox white. this was a interest progress on this and just a couple follow up spots on the proposal for your consideration going forward and for the commitsy to consider going forward. it is my bet that this parking is going to fill up as quickly as it becomes available by workers or customers or residents who want to park extra vehicles they might own that they don't have parking for. once it becomes available to the public and the whole public knows it is available, i suspect like every other available parking space in the city it will be snatched up the moment it becomes permissible for vehicles to park there. i'm under the impression the only reason it doesn't happen now is the way it is unofficially managed gave the public the impression they were not allowed to park there because the parking was reserved for the institutions. so, i'm hoping that we have sort of a plan in place to respond to that once that happens and if it doesn't happen i'm happy. i suspect it will and encourage you toconsider the idea of putting hourly limitations like 4 hour limitations on that parking or two hour limitations to increase turn over and keep people who shouldn't park there from parking there so it remains available for the intended use of the space. if that doesn't work i encourage to start thinking what it will take to meter those spaces. again, from the persperktive of keeping the spaces available for those who need if and funding enforcement. that is probably something that i would encourage you to just think about as you are rolling the thing out, not necessarily to implement it or look at implementing right away. again, i hope i'm wrong. i love the idea of a parking pass. i suspect that the institutions are looking at this. i would hope that the folks from the synagogue would be very open to the idea of letting people park in their lots when they are not there and the other folks in the christian institutions on sundays will be happy to allow the muslims park on fridays or whatever it might be, but there are plenty of times when church lots are vacant-faith based institutions are vacant and it will be cool for the ecminicle council or any counsels that exist to put toorkt a parking pass for their members that would allow for parking to happen in each other lots. i hope you look into something like that because i suspect with the reduction of parking they will need something to that effect. again, really supportive of all this. i'm glad to see it has come this far. i know this was a divisive issue for a lot of folks in my conversations i had with people about this but think it is step in the right direction and appreciate all