Damn as long as they can make profit by building more construction. This is insane. Its outrageous. The fact you have nothing to say about it, you dont get to the specifics tells me you really dont care either about what is going on in San Francisco. The gridlock is a responsibility of the Planning Department. You are improving more and more construction, Mass Construction without agreeing there should be transportation, proper transportation. Thats political incompetence and malfeasance in my view. Where is the Planning Commission . Where is the director of planning in San Francisco about the gridlock . What is your solution in 2050 . Can we get by next year with all this new construction . All this new construction in San Francisco is going to add massively to a transportation gridlock but its not on your radar. Again, where is the Planning Commissioner is the executive director of planning . Whats their plan for all the new construction. Is it a massive transit, a Public Transit being planned in San Francisco to address this new correction . Hell know. No. Because you are run by the developers. You are run by the developers. The developers dont want to have a transit tax for more mass transportation. Theyre interested in building their projects and making profit from that for the next project. Thats what theyre about. You are responsible for that. It raises the question to remove the director of planning and to put someone in charge who is going to be responsible to really deal with the gridlock in San Francisco and be accountable for all its massive construction without any planning for mass transit. Next speaker, please. Laura foot. I really appreciate the thoroughness of this report. I wasnt going to speak because this is the kind of stuff we should just get through and its great to have these kinds of educational materials to inform us as we make larger decisions. I kind of want to speak to the audience and remind everyone here that being a Planning Commissioner sucks they get yelled a lot all day, sometimes by people like me. Please treat the commissioners with a little bit more respect. Its really hard to get people to decide to spend hours of their life just having people come up over and over and over again and blame them for all of San Franciscos problems. A great place to take some of that frustration might be the board of supervisors, the people are elected and they can change a lot more of the laws. The commissioners are supposed to take the law as it is and interpret it and make a little bit of a judgment call. They cannot tax all the billionaires. Which cannot ask the commissioners to solve literally all of our problems. We can talk about how we need to solve our problems but i think that we should really troy to think about what is this commission for and and inform our decisionmaking. I want a motion for you guys to be i dont know if we have a coast or something to make you guys feel better. Thank you. Thank you. Any other Public Comment on this item . Michael adams. Im going to speak on the next item if we ever get to it. Im former city planner. Ive had a lot of experience being yelled at, curses, rewarded and thanked so it comes with the territory. One of the things that struck me in this last presentation is there a connection between these prior items that have to do with building more buildings sense tee increases and a trigger that would enable the Planning Commission to understand with some code that says for every thousand square feet of new building it will create x amount of traffic impact. Its fairly simple algebra that could be put into the code and the formal questions that come with every presentation on every bit of housing tense tee improvement and it will effect transit. We cant hope for muni to improve very soon and we have seen on one of the rides that theres going to be about the same amount of density in 2050, the amount of traffic sense tee and all the associated hazards as there is so as you add those things that influence traffic you can create a formula that helps people understand the pain and is everything that that is going to cause and put some value on whether thats worth it. In terms of that particular building and that particular structure. I have in my pocket a parking ticket ill pay when i leave here and i dont hear anybody talking about eliminating that. Can you imagine someone suggesting public land for housing so that we take that civic center, that beautiful grassy area over there and build a housing on it. What is the limit going to be . Panhandle of Golden Gate Park would make a nice site for housing. Lets really think about what were doing as we approach this public land for housing issue and ill be back to speak to that as it relates to city college. Thank you. Any other Public Comment on this item . That Public Comment is now closed. Commissioner richards. So, thank you very much for this. I remember being on the connect sf task force for a while and it was a lot to be honest with you with Everything Else going on. Theres a lot of information her and im a little bit tired. As i look through here, some things arent adding up for me. What im talking about really is were looking towards 2050 and we have increasing kind of density mandates from the state that are encroaching on us but i dont see anything about that in here. Is theyre going to pass and i look a lot the growth in San Francisco and i see the western part of the city is like the least amount of jobs and residents in that light green color. We should start modeling our future around where it will go and theres going to be we need to do a plan, a proposed plan or whatever where were talking about something that we really need to take into consideration. The other thing is, it looks like the growth and im doing these numbers in my head. The growth seems to be much later than what im seeing the impact here is so i looked at the page and this is all off the cuff. Page its the mode 2015 and 2050. Sorry. Hold on. Im sorry. Weve got the four squares on the top. So looking at this page, the question i have is that the number of trips we have 1. 6 million and 200,000 and zero the bottom and are these trips per year . This is daily trips. Our model is for typical average weekday. So, what you are saying here on this page 16 is number of trips. People who drive alone today is roughly 1. 1 million trips. Yes. Thats right. Physical trips. These are trips to, from and within. 1 million trips in a car per day, ok. Thats astounding number. These are trips. Even rips that were within the city but also trips that start outside of the city so any trip that involves being in the city. This is car traffic period. Any trip that touches San Francisco whether its someone commuting in or someone commuting out. Cor commuting within. 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 were 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 its not based on numbers given to us by Business Plans and it is based on the trips weve 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 will increase about 30 . And then Adoption Rate by those with the increase in the population 1. 245 million will adopt uber and lyft. Theyll double 97 up . Correct. These are really interesting numbers and i think overtime, really calibrating whether that is true or not and if we see for some reason growth in uber and lyft going up, are these real time year over year we dont have this fixed in our mind but next year for some reason if they run this massive discount its a it dollar a trip and everyone starts taking them, will we adjust the way we look at this . We adjust our model based on existing data so if we get new data we put those into the model to say this is what we know about our baseline year and those assumptions get adjusted. If the tax passes in november on per trip tax you will get a lot of good data so thats good so its a really good thing to make sure as data comes our you are re adjusting these things real time because we can end up far off the mark if we dont. The other thing is, we have a current deficit of money. We had this given to us when we had the sb50 discussion informational here. It was numbers pulled from the m. T. A. , from the regional things in muni and he said that the unfunded portion of muni between now and 2040 i believe it was, which was reported by muni or m. T. A. Was something in the neighborhood of like 22 billion. I know that covered the nine county bay area too. It did San Francisco and the bay area. We have this deficit right now on maintenance, buying new buses, servicing the people we have here and were not up to snuff yet and according to the numbers provided by the m. T. A. Were adding additional capacity on top of that. I guess the question i have is, thats not discussed here only in terms of overcrowding and commute times going up so the discussion on funding levels and what the new development will do is a really good portion of what this is going to look like because we have to make hard choices in the future with the money that we have. Sure, the results we shared with you today are based on if we just dont do anything and if we just assume that we do all the projects we have planned and we did no further planning but of course we want to identify more solutions and we want to identify Major Projects that would go into the plan bay area 2050 to fund those projects and part of the funding goes towards maintenance of roads and state of good repair for transit and things like that. In the donothing version, it assumes that deficit and were not going to get additional money to plug those were just doing what we do. Right. This is kind of the worstcase scenario assuming that we dont have anything beyond the transportation projects we know of today. And so the next time you see this, we will look at ideas of how to improve these numbers. Which is the whole point and it can also include land use changes its great because you come up with recommendations on what we can do to make it better being that this is the worse case. Other questions are, ridership levels, what are you forecasting in terms of ridership levels because bart is down by 5 and muni is down by a certain percent and people are switching different modes. Is that being updated . Where are we going with all of that . With ridership levels. It doesnt increase at the same rate the population is increases. So, the way that our model works is that theres a synthetic population with the number of people and they have a home destination and work destination and destinations for others trips like shopping and in the model they have the choice of cost of time and actual hard costs of those Transportation Options so those are built into assumptions into the algorithm of the model thats why you see when you look at the increase in t. N. C. S, a lot of that food shift is coming from transit even though transit increasing in absolute numbers and its decreasing proportionally because we know the cost of tncs is cheap competitive with transit and were seeing that loss. Another question, on page 16, theres a reverse trip thing where i know my fedex driver by name and i know my ups driver by name because he is on my street everyday. Does this take into consideration people not going out to get something but having a lot of stuff come to them. Delivery services, eating meals. Is that included in here too . There are freight trips that are at a high level and were doing research so in the baseline its a high level number for a total number of freight trips happening in San Francisco and then we are going to do more research about that later. It has a big impact. I think the two big things that are the big unknowns could be a state rezoning and we dont know what its going to look at and the other one is, i was reading the planning magazine that came to me and talked about the future of the way people get around in terms of Autonomous Vehicles and i have no idea where that is all going to go but if the book that was written that says Autonomous Vehicles will create such a good life and all this other stuff. It would be something as time goes on and we see what they actually can and cant do to try to consider this and consider some of this stuff in the future. We have a whole body of work as part of connect sf. What were calling the drivers of change and Technological Advancements including Autonomous Vehicles is something were monitoring or continuing to research. It wasnt included in our results today because the avs were unsure of the Adoption Rate and how many avs will be on the roads and when that will happen so it wasnt included in our model today but its something that well monitor. I appreciate it. This is incredible stuff im going to go home and look at it more. Even since connect sf was started when i was on it, we had this thing called chariot and chariot came and went so we thought o. My god, chariot will put me out of business and they went out of business so its unknowns we need to factor real time and it was really good work, thank you. Thank you, commissioner. I will also point out that the company uber has not posted a profit in 10 years and their i. P. O. Came out and it was very under we wil weunder i thinky great data. I will say at the risk of being pegged for being angry, because our climate all the time, that you know, my over arching comments about the language on the presentation are similar in that i think that you guys are doing such great work and that often other agencies make political decisions that are not in line with what we know to be factual and what the data points out to and it behooves us to be stronger in our positions of what will happen and when we know that its going to happen. I think that we know very definitively that having singletrip vehicles through uber and lyft will effect our Carbon Emissions as a city in a much stronger way than if we invested tax money and to making a better public with how we are doing macro level, you know, thinking about how our city develops and how jobs housing linkage and that we could be stronger about these things. So i will also just give a little anecdote that you know, im not up here making lots of money from the developers. I work for a nonprofit that does Youth Development and two weeks ago it was the youth and the arts and they chose Public Transportation its the theme and it was a love story that emission 14 back of the bus. Because you know for youth Public Transportation is freedom from the neighborhood and also coming back to the home that you have that means culture and it means place and its just so important, right. And so your analysis, im looking, i would also want to see, you know, a more thorough breakdown of race, gender, social class and how the Different Things that get us around effect how the city is developing and how it effects different groups of people. Its not the same. Low income people tend to take Public Transportation more and if they have to live longer, it means less of a quality of life, less time with kids. Theres power in politics and this is not so neutral. That was just my point. Thank you. Commissioner moore. I would just like i would like to commend the department for the effort of putting this together. Particularly in light of the fact we need to remind ourselves about it. That uber and lyft are not controlled by the city and county of San Francisco but the control comes from the state of california. Theyre two things working at cross purpose and this city really was leading in transit first for many years that has been greatly diminished by losing its control of what types of cars and what quantity and the real effective are circulating on our right of ways. A few more points as i was sitting up here thinking. To commissioner moores point its a good point. They want to regulate scooters and change the things that we actually were trying to get to in terms of public policy. The other question, several other things, electric vehicle adoption or electric vehicle elimination like norway decided that theyre not going to have carbon combustible engineers after 2025 or 2030. China said 2040. Were just going to say no more electric vehicles or no more gassy mighting fume vehicles. The department of environment has policy and blue print. They have specific figures and what they hope the Adoption Rate to be by certain years. I dont know them off the top of my head. I can find out. Great. I got into an argument with someone a couple of days ago about urban is better than suburban and the