So maybe then what that leaves us with is a request to the executive director for staff to really take a look at phase two in terms of closing off the entire block face and then also, it would be great to look at, as people have asked for an opportunity to more pedestrians on the street, more pedestrian features on the block. Well, id be amenable before the director leaves. Get on that. Staff do that. I have a quick question. That park, is that still a program that we do . I mean, is that still acting . What . The app where we can search the parking and stuff like that . In terms of whether the app is active . I dont think so. Once we decommission the sensors, the only info is whether the meter is active or not. I think if the Curb Management Team is out there, looking at this and looking at r. P. P. And looking at changes, then yet, that does go to my Parking Management request. Thank you. Thank you for asking. Great. All right. So with that, we have a motion and a second can you restate the motion and second . Im not clear just so staff is clear, it sounds like its a resolution to explore closing octavia street from fell to linden, which would be phase two. And explore whatever management overall traffic management, i guess do you want to add that yeah. And i dont know if we need to amend this yeah to add that or just have this be the direct to staff, whatever would be easier. I would prefer that comment be part of a motion because then, its clear that its yes, director, or no director, you have to look at this. Okay. So does somebody want to state a motion specific . A motion to amend the resolution to explore close willing. You dont really closing. You dont really need to amend the resolution. Okay. So the motion to approve which includes direct asking the executive director to ask staff to safety improvements on linden, the curb management program, which is sounds like work it sounds like work is already underway, and then further pedestrianizing octavia and around the corner on hayes street if possible. One question. I was confused about so sf park is no longer operational . So the one element so the core of sf park was the demandbased pricing, and that is not only operational but citywide, so we went from a pilot to citywide, but one element that was in the original pilot was we had sensors in the ground at every parking space that gave realtime parking info to see if a space was available, and that, we no longer have. But the core but what we found is that if you set the price right, that you can generally set it so that will will be an available parking space. So maybe the City Attorney can just is it unanimous is it fine to amend the motion or can we just add that extra language, so to speak . You can do either excuse me. Deputy City Attorney susan cleveland. You can do either. I just think you want to make sure that the direction to staff in whatever form it is is clear, and i think whatever the commission the board secretary was just clarifying with director brinkman about the motion. So as long as we have that, we can amend the resolution or you can just add that in an undocumented motion. Madam chair, what i have right now is a motion to ask staff to explore closing octavia street from fell to linden street and explore additional Parking Management on that street. Continue to explore additional Parking Management in the area, not just on octavia street. So in the project area. Yes. I dont even want to call it in the project area necessarily because it sounds like the project is only buffering patricias green, where its the surrounding blocks. Okay. In the hayes valley neighborhood. Yeah. Okay. So the motion that i have right now is a motion asking staff to explore closing octavia street from fell to linden and explore additional Parking Management in the hayes valley neighborhood. And lets also im sorry include looking at closing additional blocks of hayes street and making them transit only okay. Slow down. Im sorry. I think thats i dont thats was there an agreement from everybody to look into that. I mean, thats not to explore additional transit only streets on hayes. Okay. So the motion would be to explore closing octavia streets from fell to linden, additional Parking Management in hayes valley, and closing additional blocks of hayes street and making them transitonly lanes. Transit and taxi only. Okay. So i think that sounds like an amended motion an amended proposal. Well, i mean in terms of what was noticed to the public, its a little bit different. It may. Given the scope of what the board sounds like its action, it may just be best to have this be direction to staff. It sounds like youre in general agreement and have you all just focus on the motion the resolution thats in your packet. I think if youre all on the same page, staff can take that. And i think that was definitely my intent was this part is a direction to staff. All right. So what i have then is the board provided the minutes would then reflect that the board provided additional direction to staff to explore closing octavia street from fell to linden street, additional Parking Management in the hayes valley neighborhood and closing transit street and making them deck transit only street. Okay. Board as an appetite today. Okay. Let me just one more time, so, the direction to staff is to explore closing octavia street from fell to linden, additional Parking Management in hayes valley neighborhood, closing additional blocks of hayes street and making them transit and taxi only lanes and additional pedestrians measures, Safety Measures on linden. Thats right. Okay. Thank you. Great. All right. So we had a motion and second on the original motion. If everyone is fine, well take a vote. All in favor . Any opposition . Motion passes. Were going to move on to item 12. Item 12 thank you to the staff. Did a great job on that. [agenda item read]. Good morning or good afternoon, i should say. Almost good evening, directors. Sean kennedy, transit planning manager. And before i go through this, i just want to take a moment to thank ed. I arrived at m. T. A. Bright eyed and bushy tailed seven years ago with the directive to implement the transit effectiveness project. In the first week, i was in eds office updating the Controllers Office on the impact of the project. And he told them what a great project it was going to be. And ive taken that with me since that day, and i just want to thank you for the leadership youve shown. As director borden was saying, its proved very true. We are the envy of many of our transit peers. Thank you so much for your service, and we will watch to see where you go next and what city benefits from your service there. So that said, i want to talk about 12 folsom. [please stand by]. And thats really five major neighborhoods, the 12 serves those five major neighbors, all the way from the north to the south. This slide just kind of shows some examples of who we talked to and what we did in chinatown specifically. But essentially, like any new project, we met stakeholders and Community Members where they are. We did open houses at the stops and on the sidewalk. We want to communities, we went to backtoschool nights. We want to Service Providers in the area and talked through the options, what we saw as the benefits as well as the negative aspects of it, and collected over 1200 surveys throughout this process. We did on board process, as well. Majority people on was 57 chose option a, and 37 or so when the other option or remaining group was undecided or didnt really have an opinion. So from a staff perspective, we really had two goals we were trying to achieve. Obviously, the first was to improve Transit Service to rincon hill and then to the entire line. We are recommending what you see before you today, that is taking advantage only of transit only lanes on sacramento and clay and also takes advantage of the folsom Streetscape Project on folsom that will be including things like turn restrictions, and we put all those things together, and although it looks like a longer route, we actually think its going to be a little bit quicker and save some time because were not only using our Transit Authority improvements but taking them out of where we have some congestion problems on 2nd street. There are things around that legislation that involve stop changes, also a few yellow metered spots and turn restrictions. But with these changes, were hoping to make vast improvements, like i said, not only to o. T. P. , but for the entire line. Were super excited how this came out. Implementation as we work with folsom streetscape, theres going to be a lot of construction on there. Were looking at winter 2020 before we get the route change, and that will kind of ebb and flow depending on the construction schedule, but thats a rough timeline as of now. So super quick. I know its been a long meeting, so i wanted to go fairly fast, but im glad to take any questions or answer any issues you all have. Just one quick question. This is a big route change for the people using that bus, and it sounds like the outreach you did in advance of it has been really good, and thats great. I would just ask that we make sure the week or two before we actually change that route that we do some really good outreach for those stops that are going to be removed because i can see a future where somebody only takes the bus every couple weeks or so would walk out there and be complete disoriented out there and not know where the bus is. Other than that, i think its great because its going to not only serve more people in a growing area, but speeding it up. Great. Are there any other comments . Okay. Public comment. Is there any Public Comment . Barry and michael. Good afternoon. I just need a clarification. It does i dont want to i dont like complaining because allowing us to be able to make the turns, as well, is a great thing, but its a little confusing. Under f, is says no right turn other than muni. I think its on the east side, so theres two sides of essex. Theres the west side and the east side, and i think the west side goes straight to the freeway. So if we go on the west side, then, we can make the right turn on to harrison from essex, so i dont so im im a little confused here as to why were were why were not getting some of these other exemptions, too. But i appreciate you still continuing to let us make the the left turn from folsom to essex. So i just need clarification why under f, we cant do the same thing unless it creates too much conflict there, that would be too dangerous. That would be great to find out why we dont have that exception. Staff can address that at the end. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is roman catau. I voted in the outreach myself, so im glad it was chosen. In the presentation, i think staff mentioned 7,000 or 10,000 new residents that live in the area . I would also like to point out that theres several big tech offices in that area, as well, and in particular, were now going to with this project, were going to have a 12 folsom stop right outside the google sf office, so i hope that google will be willing to do some outreach to workers and let them know they can ride muni to work. Any additional Public Comment . Vice chair borden and members, alita dupris for the record. I feel i should speak on this. I prafl in the eastern soma rincon sill area a lot, and this will give me a few more options to get through that area because i generally commute across either by b. A. R. T. Or by a. C. Transit bus to the temporary transbay terminal. So with this, instead of trying to navigate through all that traffic on 2nd street, which ive done on a bike. Its very difficult. Theres a lot of construction down there this will allow me to get down to embarcadero and then down to harrison street or its a short walk for me from the transbay terminal parking lot and also from the new transbay terminal, and we can get that open. So this is something that will help me to navigate moreasily. I think it is worthy of your passage. Thank you. Thank you. Herbert wiener. One question. I realize you are going to remove the bus stop to 2nd street, but how is that going to affect the passengers on that corridor . On the corridor that you remove this bus route, how is it going to affect them . Will they be rudely inconvenienced . What will be the impact of these changes . Any additional Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comments closed. Directors . Go ahead. Motion to approve . Second. If there are no other questions. Is there a second . Director torres, did you have a comment . I just wanted to go back to what the last speaker said about the impacts, and do we know what all the impacts are going to be . Hi. Yes, sir. So the 10 line will continue to serve 2nd street, so therell still be a service line on 2nd. Personally, im happy. I used to take the 10, and from samsung and bush, it was like, no. Okay. Any other comments from directors . There was a motion to approve and second. All in favor . Opposed . That motion carries. Were moving on to clerk madam director [agenda item read]. Directors, following distribution of the final calendar item, staff discovered that one part of the code is mentioned twice in the transportation code, so they request an amendment to delete a section of the code that section of the code that is duplicated. It is a section of the code that discusses the evaluation of a permit application. Its just listed twice. So well make that want to make that notation when we make the motion . Okay. Govern, directors. Tom mcguire. Im joined by jason hyde whos managed the Scooter Share Program since the beginning. Its hard to believe that its been more than a year since scooters first launched with that authorization last spring, and it seems that weve been back before you many times talking about the pilot program, and the sixmonth report on the pilot program, and now were making the move with shared scooters and motorized bikes. I want to remind us of the journey that weve been on since the scooters launched back in april 2018 when we had one of the largest unauthorized launches in the u. S. , and we moved very quickly to a Regulatory Pilot Program that is the model for other big cities in the u. S. And now weve got an opportunity to make that permanent without losing the accountability that we have to scooter operators. With that, ill turn it over to jason. Thank you, tom. Good afternoon, directors. Im a senior planner in movable sfmta, here to talk about the next phase of the scooter permit program. So just a little bit of background. The Program Actually launched in april 2018 as a twomonth pilot with two permittees, scoot and skip. Each at the outset were authorized to operate up to 625 scooters each and with the possibility to double their number at the midpoint. So this was framed by the guiding principle for emerging services and technologies . These transportation code changes are also framed by that policy framework, specifically focusing on safety, accessibility, accountability, equity, and sustainability. [please stand by]. With that in mind, we still plan to give preference to operators who propose Innovative Solutions to owners who make helmets mandatory for rental. Questi we acknowledge theres still room for improvement and continued Education Needs to happen. So with that in mind, in the next round of applications, well be committing to companies with robust Education Programs and incentives for improper riding, like sidewalk riding in particular. And while we think that this is a beautiful thing, we being national it create acknowledge it creates additional demand for bike parking, and so we are proposing a rack fee for the permittees that is commensurate with the number of scooters that would be permitted. So the proposed transportation code amendments also seek to address several issues that were identified in the pilot around user and operator accountability. So in particular we are aski asking from receipt through resolution. We think that thisll improve rider accountability. And additionally, were proposing an alignment of the fines and fees with stationless bike share . And finally, were also requiring more robust education on safety reporting procedures, particularly if users are involved in a collision so that we can have more accurate crash data associated with the program . So we definitely learned from our experience with the pilot that we need to be more prescriptive about our Service Areas, the availability of scooters, as well as the distribution . And so the proposed transportation code amendments before you would allow the sfmta to establish the service area rather than the permittees as was the case in the pilot . And we hope that this will prevent a clustering of devices downtown and encourage them to be more available in parts of the city that have more availability options. Were were less availability options. Well also consider using whats called a dynamic cap which looks at the demand for scooters and the usage, so the trips per scooter per day, and well have a target for that. And if the permittees are meeting all the terms and conditions of the permit and also exhibiting demand for the scooters, we will consider a commensurate increase in their permitted fleet size. So equity was definitely was definitely identified as a key area for improvement in the midpilot evaluation, and especially when it came to outreaching key communities of concern as well as lowincome planned participation, and so to address some of these concerns, we plan to ask permittees to release a cull right lanely sensitive outreach plan thats really tailored to each neighborhood that takes languages, consideration, and needs into account. Were also asking them how they plan to promote their lowincome plan in their company as well as other plans, and additionally we are asking the companies to consider how theyll encourage local hiring opportunities and as well as hiring for disadvantaged individuals such as formerly incarcerated people and immigrant communities. In terms of our user capability, showed that scooters may reduce vehicle and private t. N. C. Use, but some were switching from more susta